National Symbols, Cultural Sites & Events

By Jude Fernando –March 10, 2015
“A democratic civilization will save itself only if it makes the language of the image into a stimulus for critical reflection — not an invitation for hypnosis.” ― Umberto Eco
“It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen.” ― Aristotle
“And I should like to be able to love my country and still love justice. I don’t want any greatness for it, particularly a greatness born of blood and falsehood. I want to keep it alive by keeping justice alive.” ― Albert Camus
National Symbols and Cultural Sites and Events
The second objective of the Ministry of Diversity and Inclusion (MID) is to foster inclusion and diversity in cultural symbols (e.g., national flag, emblem, and ID cards) and events (e.g., Independence Day celebrations, inaugurations, opening ceremonies, and commemorations and memorials) that represent an “all Sri Lankan identity” in all national institutions (e.g., administration, security, education, culture, and foreign missions). The MID should also take steps to prevent the erosion of the genuinely multiethnic and multicultural identity of cultural and religious symbols and events and sites. Inclusive national symbols create a sense of belonging and purpose for people who derive their national identity from the country’s cultural mosaic.
Peaceful coexistence is impossible when national symbols fail to be inclusive, when they embody histories of prejudice, discrimination, and violence against groups within or outside of its sovereign territory, and when the public is unaware of or provides emotive legitimacy to such histories. Inclusive national symbols could prevent the state from criminalizing dissent against such histories and legitimizing the use of force against those voicing dissent. As such, these symbols could also help prevent society from becoming imprisoned in a vicious cycle of violence when different groups attribute different meanings to national symbols in order to legitimize the use of force against other groups to meet their respective demands.
The MID should be mindful of the danger of multiculturalism becoming another source of oppression and domination. Multicultural ‘national symbols’ could lose their purpose when they provide privilege to the social, cultural, and territorial identity of one culture or group, marginalize and suppress that of others, and provide symbolic power and legitimacy for the involuntary integration or assimilation of different cultures into one overarching national culture. Although the state holds the primary responsibility of creating an inclusive symbolic national space, it could also exploit multiculturalism as a means to escape or procrastinate in fulfilling its responsibility to devolve political power and to honor its promise of transitional justice.
