The assignment of colors to political parties for the purpose of differentiation is interesting, and could even be confusing at times, what has just been reported from the US being a case in point. Having retained control of the US Senate, the Democrats are now boasting that they have crushed ‘the Red Wave’ hopes of their political rivals, the Republicans, who were thought to be doing well at the early stages of the race.
Red has become the color of the Republican Party, and blue is associated with the Democrats. Consistency in the association of colors with the two main parties in the US is thought to be of relatively recent origin unlike in Sri Lanka, where all political parties have specific colors assigned to them. According to some historians, there was no general consensus on this color-code system in the US in days of yore although in the late 1800s and the early 1900s, color-coded ballot boxes were used in some parts of that country to help the voters who were not literate; different counties however used ‘red’ and ‘blue’ to denote the Republicans and the Democrats arbitrarily; in some counties red was associated with the Republicans and blue with the Democrats while it was the other way around elsewhere.
Red is the color universally associated with leftists, and it is puzzling why it has come to be assigned to America’s Grand Old Party, which is known for its right-leaning ideologies such as capitalism, conservatism, etc., whereas it is the Democratic Party which comes close to being considered left-leaning, if at all. In the UK, the official color assigned to the Conservative Party is blue, and the Labour Party uses red, and there is no confusion as such.
Ironically, during the Cold War era, a slogan that gained currency in the US was ‘better dead than red’, meaning that the capitalist bloc preferred a nuclear war to socialism or Soviet domination. But over the decades, conservative Americans have come to adopt ‘red’ as the color of their favorite political party—the GOP!
‘Red’ in Sri Lanka
What prompted this comment however was not the hitherto announced results of the US midterm elections, or the ongoing electoral battle between the Reds and the Blues, but the JVP’s November Heroes Commemoration, which was held on Nov. 13 to remember the founder leader of the JVP, Rohana Wijeweera, and other party activists who were killed in late 1989. Current JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake, MP, stood out from the other party seniors at the commemoration on Sunday (13). He was wearing a white shirt while others were dressed in red.
It may be argued that a person’s political ideology cannot be reduced to the color of his or her dress, but traditionally the leaders and supporters of left-leaning political parties wear red at political events, and prominent among them are JVP leaders and cadres.
JVP undergoing change
The JVP has come a long way since May 14, 1965, when Wijeweera, who was only 22 years old at that time, and six other youth met to discuss how to form a revolutionary movement. Others present at the meeting were Wijesena Vitharana alias Sanath, H. Milton, Wilson Dedigama, W. T. Karunaratna, Delgoda Raja and Siripala Abeygunawardene. It has since staged two abortive armed uprisings, one in 1971 and the other in the late 1980s, and lost its founder leader and many other activists at the hands of the military, the police and vigilantes.
The current JVP leader Dissanayake’s preference for clothes of different colours can be thought to signify a desire to broaden the appeal of his party to those, especially the youth, who are not well-disposed to ‘red’ associated with die-hard Marxists, socialism being no longer in vogue in this country unlike in the past. These days, young JVP activists are seen in jeans and fancy T-shirts of various colors at party’s events aimed at attracting the youth. They look smart.
The JVP has remained a cadre-based political movement, and paradoxically this has been its strength as well as weakness. Its cadres are highly motivated and united unlike their counterparts in other political organizations. Many of them even laid down their lives on two occasions for the party’s cause. But the JVP is in a dilemma at present because it has to transform itself into a mass-based political party if it is to improve its electoral performance, having come out of its socialist cocoon, in a manner of speaking. Some political analysts are of the view that the JVP has not yet morphed into a full-fledged political party in the real sense of the term, and is still evolving.
The JVP’s transformation into a truly mass-based political party to gain more political traction to vie with the parties such as the UNP, the SLFP and the SLPP for state power requires significant changes not only to its ideology but also to the way its leaders dress, speak and interact with the general public. It must be feeling the need to remould and repackage itself, more than ever, given a reported increase in its approval ratings and the prospect of being able to win more seats.
The SLPP’s popularly has plummeted. The UNP currently has only a single parliamentary seat, and it will have to win at least 112 more seats at the next general election to gain control of the parliament. Its alliance with the SLPP will do more harm than good where elections are concerned. The SLFP is divided, and has suffered a breakaway. The SLPP dissidents have their work cut to win over the public, as they were part of a highly unpopular government. The JVP has chosen to go it alone. It does not attend events organized by the Opposition. It recently refused to take part in a protest march in Colombo. It wants to be seen to be different from the rest.
2004: flash in the pan
The JVP fared extremely well at the 2004 general election, where it obtained 39 seats including several National List slots. It was so popular at the time that some of its seniors even beat their SLFP counterparts in several districts. Wimal Weerawansa, Vijith Herath and Anura Kumara Dissanayake topped the preferential vote lists in the Colombo, Gampaha and Kurunegala districts.
The JVP could pull off a surprise in 2004 because it contested the parliamentary polls as a constituent of the SLFP-led UPFA coalition under the then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s leadership. It would have been a different story if the JVP had gone it alone at that election. The JVP has not been able to perform so well electorally since then; it has only three seats in the current parliament.
Looks matter
Party leaders’ looks matter in politics as much as their policies and actions. Chandrika marketed her winsome smile, which attracted many voters across the political spectrum in 1994, when she was elected Prime Minister and President in quick succession. During her election campaigns, she was seen in clothes of different colours. Mainstream political leaders seldom wear their party colours unlike their supporters.
Gotabaya Rajapaksa chose not to wear sataka, which is the trademark of the Rajapaksa family, as he wanted to look different and broaden his appeal of his political project. Sajith Premadasa made it a point to wear white clothes and flip-flops during his presidential election campaign in a bid to project himself as a simple person.
Dissanayake seems to have realized the limitations of his party and the need to adapt to change for its approval ratings to translate into votes. His sartorial choice can be thought to reflect that realization.
