The Sinhala‐Buddhicization of the state and the rise of authoritarianism in Sri Lanka
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sri Lanka's postindependence history suggests that continuous efforts by the Sinhala‐Buddhist politicians to reject decentralization created anxiety and distrust among minorities. The state used both Sinhala language and Buddhism to accommodate Sinhala‐Buddhist interests and provide cultural security to Sinhala‐Buddhists who feared that the Sinhala race, Buddhism, and heritage would be threatened with destruction by the Tamil and Muslim separatists and extremists. The state forced the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which demanded a separate state for North and Eastern Tamils, to silence its guns in May 2009. The military defeat of the LTTE did not produce any democratization of the island. Sinhala‐Buddhist extremist forces turned their eyes on Sri Lankan Muslims, whose elites attached to major political parties supported the war against the LTTE. This study examines the politicization of the Sinhala language and Buddhism in Sri Lanka before and after the civil war between the LTTE and the state dominated by the Sinhala‐Buddhists. It argues that Sinhala political elites willingly took measures to centralize power. The major result of centralization is the birth of the state‐seeking, but authoritarian LTTE. It will also provide some useful analysis to examine post‐war tensions between the Muslims and the Sinhala‐Buddhist extremists. Finally, I discuss some solutions to fight the rising authoritarianism to help Sri Lanka enjoy the fruits of modernization and democracy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".