Search

Following the presidential and parliamentary elections in 2010, the Sri Lankan political system has seen the rise of a ‘one-party dominant state’ and a ‘hybrid regime’. This new political order consists of a mix of democratic and authoritarian elements largely seen in countries such as Malaysia and Singapore. This essay examines the social and political changes introduced by the highly militarized regime led by Mahinda Rajapaksa, which has slanted towards a Kautilyan ideology and authoritarian constitutionalism. It is argued that Sri Lanka needs a glasnost, marking a new political and social ethos based on the principles of accountability, openness, transparency, freedom and justice.

Just war, a concept stemming from Christian theological scholarship, has become part of the Western social and political lexicon. This article examines how Buddhism as a non-Abrahamic faith has dealt with just war thinking. To this end, it specifically analyzes some of the recent scholarly studies of just war ideology in relation to the civil war in Sri Lanka. It is argued that just war thinking is essentially a question of how issues of religion and politics are handled in Buddhist countries.

This article seeks to address the problematic nature of the cultural concept in social theory, and public formulations such as multiculturalism and national identity. By examining two dominant, contrasting and complementary viewpoints of culture – the ideational drawn from anthropological theory, and the structural from a more sociological perspective – it suggests that identity is the outcome of a complex interaction of Socio-behavioural factors.

This article reviews the development experience of Sri Lanka as a third world wel fare state. Sri Lanka stands out as a unique example since it put strong emphasis on the social sector even during the early phases of its development path. The social democratic state evolved in such a way that it was committed to the pursuit of greater equity. Although the country ranked low in terms of per capita GNP, it stood out on a range of social indicators such as the Human Development Index (HDI). Thus, Sri Lanka was able to achieve greater equity in the allocation of re sources and an improved living standard, which helped it to enhance the level of human development. However, the post-1977 era saw the new government depart from its earlier social policies by promoting neo-liberal economic policies. But the Centre-Left coalition which came to power in 1994 is committed to structural adjustment with a human face, with its thrust on distributive justice and social equality. This article suggests that the way forward is to integrate minority politics and welfare politics and to do away with the electoral populism of the past.

The Paper examines selected aspects of transcultural psychiatry with a view to demonstrating the changes in theorizing that have taken place. It denotes a shift from conventional psychiatric theorizing based on epidemiological studies to a ‘new transcultural psychiatry’ which provided a broader framework for understanding mental illness. The paper draws attention to the characterisation of the nature of mental illness as a psychiatric disorder; and the problematic nature of the culture. The limitations and pitfalls inherent in the ‘new transcultural psychiatry’ theorising and a corrective, a socio-cultural model for transcultural psychiatry are discussed.

The Paper endeavours to examine the way in which the culture concept has been used in multicultural public policies. In culture theorising it identified two distinct traditions-one reminiscent of the Arts, and the other, more characteristic of the social sciences, in particular, 'cultural anthropology.' Considering the limitations of the culture concept based on a more structural approach. It considers how the culture concept is circumscribed by social factors and institutional constraints, and concludes by examining the utility of the concept of identity in moving from a macro to a micro level of analysis of culture especially in studying cultural practices and social behaviour.

Introduction: Contextualizing Australia in Asia Several commentators have seized upon Aus tralia's recent entry to the inner sanctum of East Asian Summit as a turning point in Australia's relationship with its regional neighbours. This goes to the heart of what I have termed the 'Austral ian-Asian Connection', or as others have called it, Asian Engagement or Enmeshment. We indeed have come a long way since the historian John La Nauze dismissed Australia's proximity to Asia as something for the future. As we ponder the significance of joining the East Asian Summit, many questions come to mind: does this signify a radical change in Australia's view of itself? Is this the answer or a clue to the critical question of whether Australia sees itself as an Asian nation' with a firm link to an Asian regional hegemony, or that Australia now embraces more firmly a duality i.e., as an Asian nation as well as a European nation'. If, indeed there has been a change in how we comprehend the Australian-Asian connection, what underlies this sudden embrace of an Asian future' by none other than John Howard who in the past was forthright in his criticism of the regional policies in the Hawke and Keating era? This becomes a perplexing query, particularly when one recalls that Foreign Minister Downer has stated that Australia had no wish to be part of a new regional ism such as that portrayed by Prime Minister Mahathir of Malaysia and others. Downer went on to describe this as a form of'cultural regionalism' which Australia rejects. By contrast he identified a 'Practical Regional ism' as the model to which Australia was committed. The difference between these forms of regionalism was that one is built on 'commonalities of history, of mutual cultural identity', and the other strictly on the mutual benefits of cooperation in the pursuit of common objectives. In this context, does Australia's not just willingness, but even eagerness, to be a member of the East Asian

Australia, being a settler society, an immigrant-receiving country from its inception, was until recently, firmly committed to an ideology of settlement which ensured racial and cultural homogeneity. The firm belief in ‘one country, one nation’, was achieved by a strong insistence on ‘anglo-conformity’, embodying the cultural mores and national characteristics of the early settlers, the charter groups. This close link between immigration and settlement has become problematic with the influx of waves of immigrants from non-traditional source-countries and the accompanying new philosophy of settlement, based on cultural pluralism and commonly labelled ‘multiculturalism’. The ongoing public debate and controversy in Australia1 about immigration has drawn attention to the problematic nature of the disjunction between policies of recruitment and settlement, and equally to the dilemmas confronting multiculturalism as a philosophy of settlement, and a ‘policy regime’ (Rein, 1976). In a world increasingly engulfed in ethnic conflicts and tensions arising from migration, the way in which this new policy of ‘multiculturalism’ developed in the short space of less than two decades represents a success story of migrant settlement worth recounting (see Jayasuriya, 1987; Castles et al., 1990; Foster and Stockley, 1988)).

Review(s) of: Legacies of White Australia: Race, Culture and Nation by Laksiri Jayasuriya, David Walker and Jan Gothard, University of Western Australia Press, Crawley, 2003. pp. xii + 267. $38.95 paper. Review(s) of: Facing North: A Century of Australian Engagement with Asia, Volume 1, 1901 to the 1970s by David Goldsworthy, Melbourne University Press, Carlton South, 2001. pp. xx + 523. $59.95 cloth, $36.30 paper.

This article examines the rationale and philosophical underpinnings of Australian public policy relating to language and culture, especially as they have emerged in relation to nonindigenous ethnic minorities, i.e., migrants and ethnic groups. An underlying theme is that the concepts of language and culture as they have evolved in relation to the ideologies of multiculturalism are not neutral but contested concepts which need understanding and critical analysis. The article has three main objectives. The first is to show how, historically, language—in particular English—has been an important public issue in matters of migrant settlement. Second, it examines the hidden and often unstated assumptions of social theory implicit in policies relating to language and culture by analyzing the way in which the key concepts of culture and ethnicity have been used in policies. Third, it presents the case for a paradigm shift in public policy and argues that the issue of language and culture should be re-examined and restructured to serve new and emerging social needs.