Thanks for intiating the debate.

Few points rtealted to your article.

Human rights assume an intrinsic superiority of the humans. This could be attributed to Biblical origins where it was/ is believed that humans are given dominion over the earth. Hence man( and recently women aswell) has plundered the earth and other non human forms and life. This hierrachical structure which puts mans agenda at the top the argument as epoused by Christianity was then sold to the rest of the wrold though Colonialism and has been bought by countries like China and India as well. Non anthropocentric( non human centric view points )of the world also exists in many cultures. May be human rights( despite its noble aims) is part of the problem on a grander scale.

Your response to Niranjan is an excellent piece of work!

The people who have developed thier world on “greed” and spinning a dark future for the world is still proud of their achievements. They don’t know what will happen in one hundred years to this world, if we keep on burning fuel possils at this rate. These people are not more than just crabs playing in a heating pot. They are day dreaming inside the pot. They are so masmerized about their prey of the modern world order that they don’t see the danger going to happen in the “near future”. For these “greedies” no matter what will happen to their sons and grand sons, if they can enjoy the present comforts.

Thanks!

Thanks. I think we as a nation have become very defensive and reactive, and less self critical. This is getting worse. In the end it is not West, but our own people suffer. We give enough ammunition to the West and non-western countries to exploit our weaknesses. Having said that I do not see the world only terms of nation states, but first in terms of individuals and communities. As I said in the article I see more shared understanding of and desire for universal human rights across cultures than differences. One problem with relativism is that it suppresses self-criticism in the name of difference.

I also think our anti-western rhetorical in paradoxical ways serves the selfish interest of many non-Western and Western countries and a privilege few in the Sri Lanka.

But we must seek to find more creative ways to broaden the debate on Human Rights within the country.
Jude

For a self proclaimed ethnic Jew whose parents’ relatives’ experienced the horrors of Hitler’s Auschwitz you must be having a very gullible disposition to proclaim outright that UK’s Channel 4 is CREDIBLE and UNBIASED.

Sri Lanka is 80% Sinhalese and we Sinhalese can’t do anything about that just like the English in the UK can’t do anything about they being the majority in UK

Since Buddhism is the majority religion (over 60%) Sinhalese naturally form the majority within it although we have Tamils and other ethnicities that follow Buddhism. Similarly English Christians form the majority within UK not the Hindus, the Sikhs, the Buddhists or any others. Who do you think form the majority within the British forces? English Christians or some other Ethno Religious group?

The SL armed forces are not exclusively Sinhalese Buddhist. It contains Tamils, Muslims, Burghers etc and Christians, Muslims etc

The second in command of Jaffna when Sarath Fonseka was the Jaffna commander was a Tamil who was vilified by the LTTE as a traitor. The Deep Penetration Unit of the SLA which carried out attacks deep within LTTE territory was headed by a Muslim. All of them were Sri Lankan Patriots.

You seem to be blind to LTTE’s BRUTALITY towards civilians (Tamil or otherwise) including children and pregnant women. Why?

Your Tiger tail is showing madam

You say: “It seems as if Sri Lankans never ever believed in human rights and never will except for a few people in academic, NGO circles”.

I hope this is just a sarcastic jab at certain academics and NGOs – in the human rights industry – that see themselves above the general population.

For us, human rights, animal rights and the well being of the environment are interrelated, and integral to the bringing about of a peaceful world. Just as we despise the prison system, we are equally vocal about zoos and game farms. The wanton butchering of animals and the misuse of natural resources, not surprisingly, goes hand in hand with the cheapening of human life.

In ignoring the natural world, the human-centric mind is deluded into thinking that “human rights” are the only rights. When this happens, it is disastrous for everyone involved – including animals and the environment.

“Imagine there’s no countries/ It isn’t hard to do / Nothing to kill or die for/ And no religion too/ Imagine all the people/ Living life in peace “ (John Lennon)

Most of us ordinary people, however, don’t have the luxury of sitting back and mulling over our “identity”, as our daily struggle to make ends meet keep us busy and grounded in the real world.

You will agree that as the primary holders of power the Sinhala-Buddhists must take a much larger share of responsibility for the mistakes made over a 60 yr period. Regardless of the behavior of the LTTE, holding an election between two war criminals is nothing to be proud of. Is such an election the beginning or the end of “democracy” as per your “relativistic” paradigm?

While I udnerstand your frustrations, the following statement in your response is unfair and unhelpful .

“The decades of civil war and genocide perpetrated on Tamils by Sinhalese Buddhist Troops brought only untold anguish.”

You are implicating all Sinhala Buddhist, and failed to mention the crimes committed by the LTTE. My arguments critical of cultural relativism i.e. stifling self-criticism and tyrannizing people in the culture that the relativist claim to defend apply the LTTE as well.

One way that the West can help the non-western countries is to be consistent and truthful

The decades of civil war and genocide perpetrated on Tamils by Sinhalese Buddhist Troops brought only untold anguish.

The GoSL is a brutal regime which survives by the rule of fear – if it effectively terrorizes its own people, what do you think it’d be willing to do to its perceived enemies?

It certainly does not feel that it requires a free press, an open political system or the assent of the West and whilst people in Sri Lanka are too scared to discuss the situation even in private.

It is a popular notion that Bible says ” humans are created equal”. In your article to you indicate so.

This is what you say;

“The way they associate universal rights exclusively with Christianity, Western civilization, and colonialism is particularly problematic, although it is true that the UDHR was strongly influenced by the Judeo-Christian theological position that all humans are created equal in the image of God. Inequality is not predestined or sanctioned by birth, and there is no reason for anyone to accept it. If humans were created by God, the desire for equality would be evident in all cultures, not only those influenced by Christianity”.
…………………………………………………………………….

However, in my view there is no such thing mentioned in the Bible. I think the phrase originally comes from U.S. Declaration of Independence as an idea of Thomas Jefferson.

On the other hand as per the Bible God created only two humans not all, Adam and Eva and Eva as a helper to Adam.

In this case too Eva was not equal to Adam. Adam was created from the dust of the ground and Eva from a rib of Adm and hence man and woman were created differently, not equally according to the Bible.

Even God himself treated Cain and Abel, sons of Adam and Eva, in two different ways on the basis of the offerings they brought for God, which ultimately led Cain to kill his brother.

Therefore, I am of the view that the phrase ” humans are created equal” has nothing to do with the Bible, though it is attributed to the Bible. I think the view of the Bible is something opposite to it.

Really I am not advocating the view of the Bible or a similar view. But we should not attribute anything we don’t know to something very popular and relieve from our duties.

Anyway, I cannot abstain from telling that one of the base sentences of a main western political theory has come to existence from nowhere or we all believe a statement of a single person just because it is emotionally comfortable.

[Not that I am against the notion people should be treated equal (morally – I believe in moral equality), or the idea of Rule of Law, but as Aristotle has said, if you cannot reason out something, there is something wrong in it.]

Thanks!