The Tamils sought to establish an independent Tamil State in North Eastern Sri Lanka. For years, the minority Tamils took up arms against the Sinhalese dominated the Sri Lankan state over claims of extreme marginalisation and vicious tyranny by the latter. Reflecting on the limitations of democracy, in Sri Lanka, in a speech before parliament on November 1, 1994, Lee Kuan Yew, Singaporean leader (1959-1990), remarked that one man one vote led to the domination of the majority Sinhalese over Tamils. So, what’s the point of any illusions of the government of the people, by the people and for the people? In this sense, democracy is a “numbers game” a zero: sum game of winners and losers, where the winner takes all! To that extent, democracy, for all its charm offensive, cannot deliver equitable outcomes for citizens. The contrarian school of thought, supports the overarching aims of people representation, however, it interrogates whether in fact, all persons share in government or its logical inference here the dividends of democracy? It affirms that whilst the aspiration in progressive democratic climes is the greatest democratic dividends for the greatest number of people, works, to a certain degree, it leaves a minority of people disadvantaged. Here, Aristotle’s take is poignant – if liberty and equality are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in government to the utmost. First, is the orthodox school which contends that as between absolute monarchies, autocracies, benevolent dictatorships and theocracies, representative democracy offers the best form of government because, broadly, ordinary people directly or indirectly, shape how they are governed through elections, parliaments, the operation of relatively free markets all reinforced by the rule of law. There are two prevailing schools of thought.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |