And now, medical terrorism

Another first for Sri Lanka, long known for firsts of a dubious nature, most of which are nothing to be proud of. Constantly tripping over itself to be at the forefront, not by noble deeds but by notoriety! Back to notorious if not famous is better than naught. Small minds will tend towards mediocrity.

So where is the problem? What is the problem? Who is the problem?

If all are blind, dumb and deaf to the problem they must be the proverbial monkeys or was it birds of a feather flocking together?

The crux: Standardisation, language, social standing and wealth. End result? Thinly veiled inferiority complexes among office bearers of a union whose very purpose of holding such office is to reduce everyone else to the same low common denominator. What was a noble vocation now reduced ostensibly to a labour union.

Where are the greater silent majority? Perhaps they feel they are not tarred by the brush of mediocrity. Perhaps it is beneath their sense of decorum to dignify mediocrity with comment.

Poses the questions: Would one wish to seek medical assistance from the likes of what walks the streets today? Is it a mindset that will ever reconcile with principles of the profession? The predominant motivation of the rabble on the streets is selfishness which is totally contradictory to the vocation. The parasitic aspect of free education which the general population is funding in total to their own detriment goes largely unnoticed. A case of pearls before swine perhaps, if not with certainty.

Time perhaps for the nobility in the profession, who can only be the vast majority given the obvious minority who qualify only for union positions below the dignity of the professionally eligible, to step out in defence of a profession which demands unquestionably more than its current face of disgrace.

The sooner the public realise the problem is the motives of the mediocre the better. They don’t have a cure. They are the disease!

Perhaps an open debate on the subject between the union office bearers and better qualified stalwarts in the profession conducted in the English language will put the former in their proper place. 

The resistance to a language seen as a weapon rather than a tool places doubt on the IQ of the unions. Why blame SAITM or any other private educational institution? The culprit was SWRDB, who learnt in Oxford University, that ‘Sinhala Only’ was the prescription in furtherance of his own selfish political career. 

Imagine, had he prescribed English for all, where this country would be today?

The resistance to the English language by the Buddhist clergy of yore and perhaps to this day was on the same flawed belief. Imagine, had there been an English speaking Buddhist population and more English literature on the philosophy, it could only have served the religion better on the world stage and gained wider acceptance simply by virtue of accessibility in a language common to the rest of the world.

The price of such short-sightedness is unfathomable.

T.E. Kotte