Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

09 December  2020

 

 

 

DUAL CITIZENS & HALF CITIZENS

As a person of Sri Lankan origin, living as Australian most of the time, it is quite natural that I would be strongly influenced by Diaspora power as well as influence Diaspora power .  I believe that we have to be One minded when making contributions at policy level, on the basis of  what is happening currently in our nations of origin. As per Australian Constitution, Dual citizens are prevented from becoming parliamentarians. To my mind this is due to  the high risk of using one country’s intelligence to benefit oneself in another country. Often members of the Diaspora take advantage of their links with high level members of the government of the country they left behind to impress the ordinary members in Diaspora groups who seem to have been their juniors in the former country.   

My concerns were therefore raised when I read the SBS report headed ‘‘Save farmers, save nation’: Indian-Australians hold protest against farm bills in Melbourne’:

[The opposition of the three newly enacted farm bills by the Indian Parliament echoed in the streets of Melbourne on Sunday when a group of Indian-Australians launched a peaceful protest against the new legislations in a show of solidarity with the Indian farmers.]

In principle this is in breach of the Dual Citizenship law in the Australian constitution. A good proportion of the protestors are Sikhs, who like Tamils and Muslims in Sri Lanka have striven for independence as a minority community. As per my observations, minorities who live within their community culture, often develop sense of ownership in that space more quickly than those who live in large multicultural areas. The deeper the feeling of oneness, the less the attachment with the physical form. Root cause is this invisible ownership cause.

So long as this ownership is applied within the boundaries of that culture, it is fine. But often, it is applied beyond. In the Sri Lankan war, separation was the motive of the armed leadership of minorities whilst assimilation was confirmed to be the motive of the Sinhala-Buddhist government. The Australian parallel was ‘White Only’ immigration policy.

If separation was successful, Tamils living in multicultural areas would have lost their multicultural identity or become a separate group within the Tamil community. Likewise Sinhalese.  Likewise, Australians of Indian origin who have invested in multicultural values.

True ownership is experienced and ‘shown’ only when needed by the whole. The deeper the experience, the more wholesome the feeling of ownership. Such ownership naturally prevents excessive ‘shows’.

The Victorian agreement with Government of China in relation to Belt & Road Initiative, followed by the Coronavirus issues have now led to new laws:

[A leading academic has labelled Australian states and territories a 'weak link' in rebuffing foreign interference and called for the establishment of state-based national security units.

It comes after legislation permitting the Australian government to review and scrap state, territory, local council and public university deals with other nations passed federal parliament on Tuesday.]SBS

To the extent the state leaders believe that their actions needs of  Australia in common, their engagement with governments of other nations would benefit the whole. But where the actions produce competitive outcomes that affect relationships with other states,  it is not based on belief . It is relative and is therefore not protected by the powers of belief.  This was a lesson we learnt through the Coronavirus when each state of Australia made its own decisions as per its specific experience. That is a great value from devolved management in which we are answerable only to ourselves.

Where a dual citizen  by law had actually completed the experience in the country of origin, s/he is in effect a Global citizen who is different to a Dual Citizen. Such a citizen’s contributions would be global. When one is no longer indebted to the family and/or community that groomed her/him, such a citizen is independent of that family and/or community, which then promotes the mind structure of that citizen to the next higher level. State leaders who owe the states that they lead, promote relativity.

In Sri Lanka, Sinhala only followed by Buddhism foremost confirm relativity and therefore to ‘show’. Both were separatist laws which when used in multicultural society make the users half citizens by action. Likewise Tamil only claimants in leadership outside Tamil only areas.

Two days back, Mr Anura De Silva from Dublin, asked / responded to me as follows:

[I am a bit confused with the verbiage of "Universal Power" as my knowledge of Universal Power was In the Middle Ages, referring to the Roman Emperor and the Pope when they both were struggling for the so-called dominium to be recognized as one supreme authority, which generated a prolonged political and spiritual struggle between imperial and ecclesiastical power until the Napoleonic Wars.

 

I too believe that we need to enable all citizens to live independently without being subservient to political racial, ethnic, religious groups or even governing institutions through a process of democracy and self governance.  But that process should not be hijacked by political racial, ethnic, religious groups or governing institutions even if people feel helpless, living in fear or subsequent.  What we need to do is remove those forces of unhelpfulness, fear, oppressiveness and build a free and fair nation with Justice and Equality.

In response to your comment to recommend I should have gotten to know each other more deeply through feelings, in fact that was the brotherly affection we had towards each other while we lived under one roof. But as adults, I think we should move away from making public recommendations based on feelings or emotions but with the third eye of rational thought and wisdom.]

 

My response to the above was:

The Universal Power that I refer to is the power of truth. I discovered through my own experiences here in Australia that it actually works. The more truth I shared the more intuitive knowledge I seem to gain. When I identify with the connection between ‘cause’ and ‘effect’ in my own environment , using the measures I believe in, I feel I have insight into the problem as per my true needs. When I say my true needs, I mean the home group that I feel part of.

 

I believe that I have insight into Sri Lankan Common problems because it is my ‘home group’. In the case of war – I have a duty to minority to view the problem from their angle- not only because I am a Tamil but more so because here in Australia, I was allocated that position, with those in authority who did not have knowledge of my outstanding performance, talking down to me. I gradually started certifying them as per my ‘insight’.

 

We have ‘insight’ when we truly care about the other as if the other is a part of us. I believe that we get to that state when we stop expecting beneficial outcomes for our contributions. Then our contributions go direct to ownership. We then become the Energy that works the system. Hence the saying that behind every successful man there is a woman.

 

I feel that Gandhi discovered this power in South Africa by upholding his truth non-violently. When we retaliate – we are ‘taking’ benefits and hence our contributions do not go towards ‘ownership’.

 

I believe that all of us develop our own laws as per our needs. Some of it may merge with the official laws but others may not. To the extent they do not – and we care about the whole system that has supported us – we would feel inclined to fight against the system – not actively but sharing our insight anyway we can. This is why I write.

 

Anura, I feel that the Universal Franchise through which we elect leaders is so named due to the foundation of democracy being Belief. Once we believe there are no rights and wrongs within that group.

 

I hope that this clarifies my understanding of Universal power. The Pope would have considered God as ultimate reality but the Emperor by necessity needed to be his own ultimate reality. This is also the problem in Sri Lanka which is often covered up by minorities retaliating and making it easier to blame ‘rebels’]

 

To my mind, the likes of Mr Anura De Silva from Dublin, who seeks through higher pathways is global. Sinhalese only and Tamil only citizens who live within their local boundaries  driven by their local beliefs are independent persons who will share the power of sovereignty with any place that becomes their home. Sinhalese only and Tamil only citizens who apply their policies outside their local boundaries are relatives and  in wider Sri Lanka – they are juniors to Sri Lankans who believe in Sri Lanka and do not ‘show’ that they are Sri Lankans except when there is a need by Sri Lanka.