Comments on: Crossing over to the other side of a unitary state https://groundviews.org/2009/09/05/crossing-over-to-the-other-side-of-a-unitary-state/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=crossing-over-to-the-other-side-of-a-unitary-state Journalism for Citizens Mon, 07 Sep 2009 00:13:08 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.1 By: Haren https://groundviews.org/2009/09/05/crossing-over-to-the-other-side-of-a-unitary-state/#comment-8856 Mon, 07 Sep 2009 00:13:08 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1630#comment-8856 Heshan, I agree wholeheartedly. If we consider real statistics, the probability of being a victim of a suicide attack is a lot higher than one in a million – possibly one in ten thousand or so (assuming a total of two thousand Sri Lankans – Civilians and military both) have died in suicide attacks out of a population of 20 million. the probability of being caught in a traffic accident is perhaps hundred times more considering i have myself been in two already in a third of my expected lifespan. but yes, i have considered these statistics with the same thoughts as your.
the only point i would add is that for me, the line between the government and citizenry is not so distinct… and as for determining what’s more important and better is a subjective matter. surely, if one of my lovedones were a victim of the yal devi bombing, soucide attacks and terrorist tacktics would matter a lot more to me than the question of ‘apathy’ as you describe it – which is no less an issue.

]]> By: Heshan https://groundviews.org/2009/09/05/crossing-over-to-the-other-side-of-a-unitary-state/#comment-8849 Sun, 06 Sep 2009 15:47:45 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1630#comment-8849 Definitions are but relative. If you think in absolutes, then you’re doomed from the start. So for example… take the case of the “terrorist.” This in fact a politically motivated definition. It is not the “terrorist” who need instill fear in the populace; it is the Government and its cronies. After all, a suicide bomber has but one act, one grand crescendo. The probability that you yourself will be caught up in this final act is roughly one in a million, the equivalent of being hit by a drunk driver while crossing the street on a green light in broad daylight.

On the other hand, Government corruption, Government thuggery, and Government folly are far more pervasive. We can perhaps “convict” the terrorist – suicide bomber – for one act, but it is an act for which he pays the ultimate price simultaneously. On the other hand, our friend the Government does not wish to indulge in martyrdom and so resorts to a host of deceptive mechanisms to hide its sins.

To simply hunt down potential suicide bombers and ignore the source of the problem – which is largely a political question – is to take a circular approach. Until and unless the grievances of the so-called suicide bomber are objectively weighed and an optimum solution is found, within the sphere of public debate, that is agreeable to long-term sustainability, the “terrorist” will re-appear, again and again. The terrorist need not be Tamil… the terrorist can appear in the form of zero future for the children of those policemen checking the bags, little to no improvement in the quality of the train one rides (due to an acute shortage of technically skilled workers), etc.

To summarize, the real terrorist is Government apathy. Apathy that stems from presiding over a welfare state. Dealing with that apathy is far better than reminiscing about how a search might have prevented a tragedy in 1985. Look at the entire historical picture – as they say, the “sum is greater than its parts.”

]]>