This phrase refers back to a suite of precepts of government theory that, by trial and error, insight and self-correction, crystallized over centuries as European civilization shifted from monarchy and institutional religion to other forms of political organization espousing different relationships between the ruler and the ruled within the Republican paradigm, upon which nation-state democracies, such as Sri Lanka, are purportedly based.

I think Mirak’s views are insightful, on one level.

However, as a general comment not particular to Mirak, thought it was a year ago, the assessment of politics in the aftermath of Vanni seems pathological. If you kill 40, 400, or 40,000 … what matters is electoral calculus, not justice.

This returns us to this phrase, ‘Sri Lankan social contract’, and the project of forging a new one.

What was the old social contract in Sri Lanka? And indeed, what is the new one? Was there ever a Sri Lankan social contract or is it still mired in the logic of kingdoms and paternalism?

If there is a social contract, does this include rule of law? In this new social contract, does killing ANY Tamil while the LTTE existed fall under collateral damage?

Do captured LTTE combatants have any rights, or should they all be murdered off? Was it just to force a Tamil population to vote while thousands of bodies of their beloved still rotted on the beach?

If we step outside the Vanni massacre context, will the government prosecute any LTTE combatants for massacres against Muslims or Sinhalese? Will it prosecute 1?

Will it prosecute SLA atrocities perpetrated against non-Tamil peoples such as rape of Tamils and Muslims in Amparai? What social contract did the government have with Lasantha, Sivaram, and myriad others?

In the Sri Lankan social contract, do the Sri Lankan people expect justice for violations of law, or is this considered unreasonable, as it were? Do the Sri lankan people expect a social contract?

This list is not exhaustive.

There is an opportunity to make this peace in Sri Lanka, substantively post-war, versus a peace that is primarily the absence of war.

In the new Sri Lankan social contract, Sri Lankans must stand FOR something, not just AGAINST anything, which has been at the heart of politics for 3 decades or more.

Under Mahinda, ironically, what is visible is the majority community is as powerless as the minority has been since independence, a condition of Sri Lankan life that does not discriminate between ethnicity under this adminstration.

Beyond ethnic party politics, LTTE or not, you still have the issue of tyrannical majoritarianism from the minority position, and general governance issues from the majority position. There is no check and balance on executive power, no means to redistribute liberty on a non-racial basis, no ability to redress violations of law, or no impulse to confront the past.

In Sri Lanka’s old or new social contract, if you’re dead, you’re dead. This is the state I believe Sri Lanka’s old and new social contract is in.

A denial of history will lead to its repeat, if not in one form, then another. There is a transitional justice moment available to keep history as history, and make peace post-war.

Sri Lanka needs justice now, more than ever, for everybody, much more so than another round of elections.

I think your namesake ‘paints’ a different take on this, quoting the reactions of Elvis-Beatles era Jaffna farmers, here:

http://www.groundviews.org/2010/01/11/colour-in-sri-lankan-politics/

But his green-blue comparison may be out-dated, and your judgement about SLFP more correct.

Interesting article. The SLFP was always a racist, chauvinist , Sinhala Buddhist party. The only period in which it was less so was during Chandrika B’s time in office.
Some ardent supporters of the SLFP who I have spoken to after the war ended are of the opinion that “Tamils belong in India and not in Sri Lanka.” How can the ethnic problem be solved if a major party like the SLFP and sections of its supporters are racist?
Also generally speaking many Sinhalese are opposed to granting devolution to Tamils and in general to minorities. This attitude has worsened after the war ended. As you rightly say the ethnic issue has very deep roots in this country.