Anarkalli’s gall

As always, Anarkalli is the centre of attention. The young actress has had the gall to run for higher office and it’s the talk of the town. Beyond questioning her competence, however, perhaps we should look at the other politicians. Whatever Anarkalli’s flaws, she is not a murderer, a rapist or an extortionist. She is not, in short, a common criminal. In Sri Lankan politics today, this is better than average.

Not from Galle

I still wouldn’t vote for Anarkalli. She’s not from Galle, for one thing. I firmly believe that local people can govern themselves efficiently and don’t need Colombians swooping in. Running for an open seat outstation is a way to personal advancement, but it doesn’t necessarily serve the community.

Anarkalli is also based in a hotel, lunches at Lighthouse, etc. She doesn’t seem like she’d be the most accessible representative. However much TV and print exposure she buys (and already has) this is not the retail politics that tends to win elections. More to the point, it isn’t the personal contact that gives common people at least the illusion of accessibility. Politicians tend to disappear after elections, but she isn’t even pretending.

The Legitimacy

However, Anarkalli has not so far been implicated in election violence, corruption or general bad behaviour. She’s not known for thrashing people, abusing power or stealing. This is in stark contrast to many candidates, including the top vote-getters in the Western Provincial Council. So many politicians get to the top through sheer thuggery that it’s not really news anymore. But perhaps it should be.

Many of the people we elect would be in jail were they not on state service. Many have mastered the art of retail politics without actually bringing home the goods. They hurt people and serve themselves. This is now so common that we don’t question or apply any consequences to these individuals. It’s basically ‘boys will be boys’.

Double standards

However, if a girl has the temerity to run for office we ask what she’s doing. Her looks and her gender are the talk of the town rather than the common violence and selfishness of other candidates. We look at the candidate who stands out rather than the ones who fit in, and that is far more terrifying.

The fact is that it is normal for a political son to grow up on the state’s dime, carry guns, commit violence, hurt people and then run for office with a straight face. It is normal for someone to enter politics through thuggery or the underworld. It is much harder for the many decent candidates to run not because the bad ones will thrash them, but because the public lets them get away with it, because we consider it normal. But it’s not.

What is normal

Anarkalli is not really the odd one out. She’s still a legitimate candidate who hasn’t broken any laws or bones, and isn’t a threat to the public peace. However extravagant her lifestyle is, she pays for it and doesn’t take from the taxpayers. The real odd ones out are those who commit crimes and violence, often paid for by the people, and then run for public office without any concern. That they pass without notice says more about our public values than it does about Anarkalli.

Anarkalli is the centre of attention, but the real story is at the periphery. All the politicians who work in the shadows because no one calls them out. We’re so accustomed to selfishness and violence that we elect many people who should be in jail. This makes it harder for the many honest and hard-working public servants to survive. Then we spend our time talking about how weird Anarkalli is, without looking at the insanity that passes for normal.