Features

Moving up the Colonial civil services ladder in the Caribbean and Africa

Published

4 years ago

2022/10/30

Thilina Walpola

by Sir. Henry Monck-Mason Moore
Last British Governor of then Ceylon

The writer outlines his career prior to his return to Ceylon

Towards the end of 1921 1 went on leave when I met Miss Benson again in London and we became engaged. She was at the time a very brilliant student at the Royal Academy schools to which she had gone after working in the Slade School. Her marriage to me in December of that year put an end to what might have been a great career as a painter. Since my retirement she had done some serious painting again.

We had to cut our honeymoon short, as I was unexpectedly offered the post of Colonial Secretary, Bermuda. It represented promotion only in status, as the salary attached was less than I was drawing in Ceylon, no official house was provided and no passage allowance. After some 18 months I applied for a transfer, regardless of status, to an appointment in some other Colony where we could live on our pay, and in 1924 I was offered the post of Principal Assistant Secretary, Nigeria, which I accepted.

Though ruinously expensive, our time in Bermuda had its compensations. Prohibition had not been rescinded in America, and three ships a week from New York brought shiploads of its thirsty citizens to the hotels and bars of this popular tourist resort. Among them we met many charming people, though it was impossible to return their hospitality in the sort of boarding house in which we were reduced to live. The old Bermudian families lived in a select social circle of their own. Many of them let their charming old colonial type houses for the American season at highly inflated rentals on which they were able to live in great comfort for the rest of the year.

The Chief Justice, the Colonial Secretary and the Chief of Police were the only three imported officials, and it was difficult, if not impossible to get the House of Assembly to improve their conditions of service. The executive had no representation in the lower house – even the Attorney-General, a Bermudian and member of the Executive Council, had to secure a seat in some constituency, before he could sit and introduce Government bills.

The Legislative Council, the upper house, consisted of the Chief Justice as President, the Colonial Secretary and Receiver-General (Treasury and Customs) as official members with two unofficial members who had won their spurs in the lower house. The Governor was always a soldier and commander of the local garrison. He presided over the Executive Council, but took no part in the debates of either house, his proposals being forwarded to the Legislature by way of “message,” and had no powers, other than those of persuasion, of securing his policy being adopted. Any idea of Colonial Office control was bitterly resented and the Assembly has succeeded in maintaining its virtual independence up to the present day.

For me it was a novel and somewhat exasperating experience to have to plunge so abruptly into the whirlpool of local politics in an island where, because of its very smallness, party feelings were easily aroused and personal rivalries were rampant. In retrospect it was no doubt a useful experience for the more controversial political crises in which I was destined to be involved in Kenya and still later in Ceylon.

In Bermuda the franchise was dependent on a property qualification which was jealously guarded by the old Bermudian families. As a result there was in my time only one coloured member of the House of Assembly, and socially the colour bar was complete. Immigration from the West Indies was closely controlled, and the Bermudian Negroes, mostly descendants of emancipated slaves, were generally employed as domestic servants, carriage drivers – no motor cars were allowed in the island – and dock labourers. The growing of fresh vegetables and the Bermuda Lily was in the hands of specially imported Portuguese, who were skilled market gardeners. The colour question, therefore, in my day had not assumed serious proportions.

Nigeria

In 1924, I accepted the post of Principal Assistant Secretary in the Lagos Secretariat, Nigeria, having refused the appointment of Colonial Secretary, Bahamas, where I knew the conditions were much the same as in Bermuda and the cost of living equally expensive. On arrival, as I have already recorded, I found Sir Hugh Clifford was Governor and Sir Donald Cameron Chief Secretary. When Northern and Southern Nigeria were united in a single administration by Lord Lugard, Sir Donald had been responsible for much of the detailed work behind the scene. He was primarily an office man with Southern Nigerian experience and was not persona grata to the Lieutenant-Governors of the North.

Whether for this or for reasons of economy he was not given the status or salary which his duties and responsibilities deserved. Sir Hugh Clifford on his arrival immediately set up a well-staffed and organized Central Secretariat in Lagos, made Sir Donald Chief Secretary, and gave him equivalent status and salary with the Lieutenant-Governors of Northern and Southern Nigeria. As a result Sir Hugh and Sir Donald worked together in great harmony, and were a formidable team.

Sir Donald absorbed much of Sir Hugh’s administrative experience, but at the same time brought his acid intelligence to bear on Sir Hugh’s more exuberant proposals. Before long Sir Donald was promoted to the Governorship of Tanganyika, and was, succeeded by Sir F. M. Baddeley from Malaya.On the announcement that the Prince of Wales was to visit Nigeria and the West Coast Colonies en route to Cape Town, Sir Hugh entered enthusiastically into the preparation of somewhat grandiose plans for his reception. A reception committee was set up of which I became the secretary, while Lady Clifford, who was in London, kept in touch with the Prince’s staff, at St. James’ Palace.

In the midst of all these preparations Sir Hugh had something in the nature of a nervous breakdown and for six weeks retired up country for a rest to await the arrival of Lady Clifford. At the last moment, owing to an outbreak of smallpox in Lagos, the visit was almost abandoned altogether, but eventually this difficulty was overcome by re-arranging the itinerary so that the visit to Lagos was made after the quarantine period had expired.

As a result Sir Hugh alternated between periods of deep depression and high exaltation, and it was on the latter note that eventually he accompanied the Prince throughout his visit. A contributory factor was that he knew by this time that he was to become Governor of Ceylon, a stepping-stone to the Governorship of Malaya, which had been his life long ambition.During the last few weeks, between the departure of the Prince of Wales and Sir Hugh’s own departure on leave prior to taking up the Ceylon appointment, his behaviour became suggestive of some form of mental instability, and it was reported by some of his friends to the medical authorities that they were apprehensive that he was suffering from delusions.

What steps, if any, were taken to report this to the Colonial Office officially I do not know. In view of the tragic end to his brilliant career when Governor of Malaya, one is left wondering whether this could have been in any way avoided.In 1927 I was promoted to Deputy Chief Secretary in succession to Sir Shenton Thomas, who was appointed Colonial Secretary in the Gold Coast from which he went later to Singapore as Governor and became a Japanese prisoner of war on the fall of Singapore. By that time Sir Graeme Thomson had succeeded Sir Hugh Clifford as Governor of Nigeria, and my wife and I were naturally delighted at again serving under him and Lady Thomson, whom we had known so well in Ceylon.

They had had, I believe, a difficult time in British Guiana, where Sir Graeme had introduced some constitutional reforms in the teeth of much local unofficial opposition. As a result he seemed to have lost some of his early vigour, though he early initiated a new housing scheme for Government servants, which was long overdue. He appointed two committees for Northern and Southern Nigeria and I was fortunate in being appointed Secretary to both. He also took the revolutionary step in those days of appointing a woman member to each. This was a wise move as by that time more and more wives were coming out to join their husbands during their tours of service, which had been prohibited or greatly restricted in the past.

As a result my wife and I had the opportunity of making, extensive tours in the two provinces and seeing something of out-station life, which was a welcome change from the somewhat suburban atmosphere of Lagos. Later Sir Graeme fell seriously ill with an internal haemorrhage, and when I left in 1929 to take up the appointment of Colonial Secretary, Kenya, he was lying in bed in Government House on the danger list. He subsequently recovered but I don’t think he was ever quite the same man again.

Kenya

In 1929 we arrived in Nairobi to find the Governor Sir Edward Grigg in London and my predecessor Sir Edward Denham on leave preparatory to taking up the appointment of Governor of Jamaica. So the Chief Justice, Sir Jacob Bath, was acting as Governor and continued to do so till the return of Sir Edward Grigg. Kenya was in the throes of much political agitation owing to the demand of the Indians to be put on a common roll with the European elected members instead of an Indian communal roll. At the same time the European elected members were pressing for closer union between the territories of Kenya, Uganda, and Tanganyika.

Mr. Amery, the Secretary of State for the Colonies in the Conservative Government, was a strong advocate of such a policy, and had privately instructed Sir Edward Grigg to prepare the ground for it. With the support of Lord Delamere, the leader of the Settlers, an imposing new Government House, designed by Sir Herbert Baker, had been built on lines suitable for the accommodation of a Governor-General of the three territories.

Neither Uganda nor Tanganyika were enthusiastic over this proposal, as they were apprehensive of domination by White Settler opinion. The controversy was referred to London where an Inter-Parliamentary Committee advised against any immediate action without, closing the door to its further consideration in the future. By this time the world economic depression was threatening and Lord Delamere himself realized that the scheme must be put into cold storage till economic conditions were more favourable. With the advent of Lord Passfield as Secretary for the Colonies under the Labour Government, a White Paper was issued which gave the agitation its quietus.

The Indians at first boycotted both the Municipal and Legislative Council elections but eventually accepted a communal role, which enabled them to take their part in municipal and legislative activities. It was in this super-charged atmosphere that I found myself, as, Colonial Secretary, Leader of the Official majority in the Legislative Council, in which I made my first appearance with some trepidation, as neither in Bermuda nor Nigeria did I have any experience of the rough and tumble of parliamentary debate.

Eventually I found my feet and was able to establish friendly relations with all sides of the House despite verbal encounters in the debating chamber. But by this time constitutional controversies were temporarily forgotten in the attempt to grapple with the serious financial position of the Colony owing to the world depression.It was at this time that I first met General Smuts when I sat next to him at a dinner given in his honour on his way to attend the World Economic Conference. Speaking from a few notes scribbled on the back of his menu card, he adroitly side-stepped any local controversial issues and won general applause for his statesmanlike and noncommittal appreciation of the situation. I little thought that I was later to be brought into so much closer association with him during World War II.

Owing to the collapse of world prices the European farmers were in serious straits with the banks calling in mortgages and declining to make advances to meet current expenditure. Some relief was afforded by the Government’s establishment of a Land Bank, and by the discovery of alluvial gold in the Kakamega area; many farmers left their wives to run the farms and went to pan gold themselves. But no substantial gold mining materialized, and this proved only a temporary expedient.

By this time Sir Edward Grigg’s term of office was expiring, and I acted as Governor till the arrival of his successor, Sir Joseph Byrne. His relations with Lord Delamere were strained from the first, and the situation was not made easier by the fact that, although a levy on salaries had been imposed on all Government officers and Government expenditure reduced to a minimum, the financial position of the Colony was still very bad.

Accordingly Lord Moyne was sent out by the Secretary of State to report on the situation. His original term of reference was to review the revenue position and its allocation between European, Indian and native services. The natives paid hut and poll tax but non-natives paid no direct taxation other than certain charges for schools and hospitals. Lord Moyne was later instructed to make recommendations for balancing the Budget and recommended the introduction of income tax for all non-natives.

This gave rise to one of the most heated controversies in Kenya’s history. After the Bill had passed its Second Reading by use of the Official majority, Lord Francis Scott and Col Grogan flew to London to see the Secretary of State, Sir Philip Cunliffe Lister, to gain support to alternative proposals proposed by the European elected members.

They were able to induce the Secretary of State to give their proposals a trial, and the Income Tax Bill was dropped. In the event, as the local government had foreseen, some of their proposals proved unworkable and the remainder failed miserably to produce the revenue required. Eventually, after long delay, agreement was reached to the introduction of Income Tax as an emergency measure. It is still on the statute book !

On Lord Delamere’s death, Lord Francis Scott had become leader of the European elected members. As explained above he had in London secured the last minute approval of the Secretary of State to the shelving of the Income Tax Bill. This was hailed with delight as a defeat of the local government. At this awkward moment Sir Joseph Byrne had to go on leave for health reasons and I was left to carry the baby.It was a highly controversial period and later, after Sir Joseph’s return, Cunliffe-Lister flew out himself to visit Kakamega and meet a deputation of the elected members. Unfortunately he was taken seriously ill and lay for days in Government House before he was out of danger. His visit, therefore, did little to remove the tension, particularly as he was unwilling to provide the financial aid on the lines recommended by the elected members.

By 1934 when I left to become Governor of Sierra Leone, Kenya was slowly emerging from the depression. I was first offered the Governorship of British Guiana. But this I refused on the advice once given to me by Sir Graeme Thomson. He had accepted it himself with enthusiasm as he had had high hopes of developing its largely unexplored interior. But he left it disillusioned, and as my experience in Bermuda, though not in the West Indies, had given me some insight into West Indian conditions, I remembered his advice and declined. Soon after Sierra Leone fell vacant, of which Sir Joseph Byrne had previously been Governor. He advised me to accept, which I did.

It was a difficult choice, as it involved leaving our two young daughters in England. For my wife it meant breaking up our home again, and repeating the experience in Nigeria of spending part of the time with me and part with the children. It is the hard price that the Colonial Servant has to pay, but it is the wife who has to pay the hardest price.

In the event unexpected relief came in 1937 by my appointment as an Under Secretary of State in the Colonial Office. Mr. Ormsby-Gore, later Lord Harlech, initiated the idea of bringing in temporarily a junior Governor into the higher echelons of the Home Civil Service instead of bringing in junior officers – known as “Beachcombers” – to work in the lower ranks. It represented a very considerable financial loss and in our case was only rendered possible by the generosity of my wife’s parents.

During my comparatively brief period in Sierra Leone I was able to lay the foundations of a closer administration of the Protectorate, which was somewhat haphazardly administered through a host of minor chiefs. I sent Mr. Fenton – a most efficient officer – to study the local native administration being set up, particularly among the Ondos in southern Nigeria. He prepared a most useful report and its recommendations were being implemented when I left.

In the past most emphasis had been laid on Freetown itself, where the educated “creoles” – descendants of the original ex slave settlements – held a monopoly of clerical appointments and trading interests in the West Coast. With the spread of education in the Gold Coast and Nigeria local men were taking their place, while the Syrian traders were successfully ousting them. White collared unemployment was becoming a problem in Freetown, and the interests of the Protectorate natives were of secondary importance to the unofficial members of the Legislative Council.

The development of iron ore at Marampa and the discovery of diamonds and some alluvial gold had revolutionary results, as it became clear that on the development of the mineral resources of the Protectorate depended the prosperity of Sierra Leone, rather, than on the precarious export of palm kernels and palm oil. I also with the aid of the Colonial Development Fund had a circular road driven round the Peninsula which proved to be of great value during the war.

Representatives of the Army, Navy and Air Force, arrived to study sites for aerodromes, flying boat bases, and battery extensions and boom-harbour defences, but little progress had been made by the time I left. I appointed Mr. Beoku Betts, the first Creole to become a member of the local legal department. He became, I believe, a good Government servant despite his having previously graced the Opposition benches in the Legislative Council.

All News Advertisement

Features

Buddhist Approach to Human Challenges

Published

18 hours ago

2026/05/1

Thilina Walpola

Life, by its very nature, invariably presents a myriad of challenges that are fundamental to the human experience. The various social ills that afflict humanity cannot be understood without recognizing the profound human dynamics at play. Navigating these challenges according to Buddhism involves shifting from attempting to control external circumstances to mastering one’s internal responses. Central to these challenges are certain detrimental drives stemming from pernicious distortions in the functioning of the human mind.

According to Buddhism, human suffering—both on a personal and societal level—arises from three unwholesome roots: greed, hatred, and ignorance or delusion. These roots manifest primarily as the unbridled proliferation of these negative states, serving as the foundation for our conduct. The Buddhist perspective offers profound insights for confronting these difficulties by emphasizing the nature of suffering, known as dukkha. Buddhism teaches that suffering (dukkha) is an inevitable part of life and is fueled by greed, hatred, and ignorance or delusion. This approach promotes mental transformation through mindfulness, ethical living, and the cultivation of wisdom, empowering individuals to confront their struggles with clarity and resilience.

Furthermore, accepting that suffering and difficulty are inherent parts of the human experience—while expecting life to be free of challenges—is, in itself, a cause of suffering. It is also important to recognize that all situations, whether good or bad, are temporary. This understanding helps reduce anxiety when facing difficult times, as these will eventually pass, and it prevents possessiveness during happy moments. Cultivating mindfulness (sati) and living in the present moment without dwelling on the past or worrying about the future is essential.

Understanding that all things—emotions, situations, relationships, and physical bodies—are constantly changing and in a state of flux helps reduce the fear of loss and provides comfort during difficult times, ensuring that we know pain will pass. Moreover, recognizing that the self, or ego, is not a fixed entity minimizes selfish grasping, arrogance, and the tendency to perceive challenges as personal attacks.

At the core of many human challenges lie the three unwholesome mental qualities identified by Buddhism: greed (raga), hatred (dovesa), and ignorance or delusion (avijja or moha). These states of mind serve as obstacles to spiritual progress and underlie a spectrum of harmful thoughts and actions. The Buddha employed powerful metaphors to illustrate these forces, referring to them as the three poisons or fires that ignite suffering and trap beings in the cycle of samsara.

Greed leads to insatiable desires that obscure our awareness of others’ needs, creating a cycle of frustration. Greed encompasses all forms of appetite, such as desire, lust, craving, and longing, manifesting in both physical and mental forms. It embodies the concept of grasping, leading to clinging and an inability to let go. As an unwholesome mental state, greed can become insatiable and inexhaustible. People are often drawn to pleasant things, and no amount of forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, or mental objects can satisfy their desires. In their intense thirst for possession or gratification of desire, individuals may become trapped in the wheel of samsara, overlooking the needs of marginalized groups based on religion and ethnicity (as noted by Piyadassi Thera). Those who overcome greed realize that all mundane pleasures are fleeting and transient. In a society driven by consumerism, people may find themselves endlessly chasing after things of little value, becoming enslaved by them.

Hatred is another unwholesome mental state that fosters division and conflict, distancing us from genuine relationships. It encompasses unwholesome mental states such as ill will, enmity, hostility, and prejudice. Hatred can be subtle, lying dormant in a person’s mind until it finds expression in unexpected moments. This destructive emotion can degenerate into mass-scale violence and bloodshed within society. Today, hatred and hostility against minorities based on religion and ethnicity are prevalent in many countries. People are often targeted by bigotry and hate, leading to a rise in antagonistic and derogatory behavior toward certain religious and ethnic groups. Hatred, enmity, and retaliation do not foster spiritual well-being; rather, they vitiate our own minds. Buddhists are encouraged to cultivate metta (loving-kindness). Greed and hatred, coupled with ignorance, are the chief causes of the evils that pervade this deluded world. As noted by Narada, “The enemy of the whole world is lust (greed), through which all evils come to living beings. This lust, when obstructed by some cause, transforms into wrath.”

The most profound of these afflictions, ignorance (avijja) or delusion (moha), clouds our judgment and obscures our capacity for understanding, causing us to harm ourselves and others through misguided actions. Addressing bhikkhus, the Buddha declared, ” I do not perceive any single hindrance other than the hindrance of ignorance by which mankind is obstructed, and for so long as in samsara, it is indeed through the hindrance of ignorance that humankind is obstructed and for a long time runs on, wanders in samsara. No other single thing exists like the hindrance of ignorance or delusion, which obstructs humankind and make wander forever. This unwholesome mindset generates negative speech, actions, and thoughts, perpetuating our own suffering. As stated in the Dhammapada, “All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; if one speaks or acts with an evil mind, suffering follows.”

Buddhism urges us to go beyond merely addressing the symptoms of our problems. Instead, it invites us to explore the roots of our suffering and examine how greed, hatred, and ignorance manifest in our lives. By uncovering these sources of distress, we can cultivate essential qualities such as compassion, loving-kindness (metta), and acceptance. These virtues are crucial for ethical engagement with significant societal issues, including environmental challenges and social inequality.

In a world marked by material prosperity and emotional chaos, many individuals may feel lost or overwhelmed. The teachings of the Buddha remain relevant today, reminding us that the origins of our struggles often reside within our own minds. By practising ethical self-discipline and steering clear of destructive emotions like jealousy, anger, and arrogance, we can transform our experiences and relationships.

Buddhism teaches that cultivating wholesome mental qualities is essential for spiritual advancement. The positive counterparts to the three unwholesome states are non-greed (alobha), non-hatred (adosa), and non-delusion (amoha). These virtues represent not merely the absence of negativity but also the active presence of beneficial qualities such as generosity (dana), loving kindness (metta), and wisdom (panna). Each of these six mental states serves as a foundation for both personal growth and societal harmony.

Human beings are often tempted by moral transgressions rooted in unwholesome qualities. Actions driven by greed, hatred and ignorance require wisdom and mindful awareness to overcome them, allowing us to see the interconnectedness of all beings and act accordingly.

As we strive to abandon these unwholesome states of mind and cultivate awareness, we contribute positively to our lives and the broader world. By embracing Buddhist teachings, we learn that transforming our minds can significantly impact our experiences and the lives of those around us. Through this mindful practice, we can aspire to create a more compassionate, harmonious existence, transcending the limitations of unwholesome mental states and fostering a deeper connection with ourselves and others.

by Dr. Chandradasa Nanayakkara

Features

How does the Buddha differ?

Published

18 hours ago

2026/05/1

Thilina Walpola

Buddhism, perhaps, is not a religion if the definition of religion is strictly applied. However, by an extension of that definition, as well as by consensus, Buddhism is considered a religion and is the fourth largest religion with about half a billion followers worldwide. Of the four great religions in the world, Christianity is still way ahead with 2.6 billion adherents, followed by Islam with 1.9 billion and Hinduism with 1.2 billion followers. In most Western Christian countries church attendances are on the decline whilst the numbers following Islam are increasing with Islamic youth displaying signs of increasing religious ardour. There are recent reports that Buddhism has also joined the ranks of shrinking religions. Is this cause for concern? Is this happening by the very nature of Buddhism?

Hinduism, the world’s oldest living religion rooted in the Indus Valley Civilization and dating back at least four millennia, is considered to have evolved from ancient cultural and religious practices than being founded by a single individual, unlike the other three religions. The Buddha differs from Jesus Christ and Prophet Mohammed in many ways, the most important being that there is no higher power involved in what the Buddha discovered.

Jesus Christ is considered the ‘Son of God’ and Christianity is built on the life, resurrection and teachings of Christ with emphasis on the belief in one God expressed through the Trinity: God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit. Therefore, there is no room for questioning the words of the Almighty passed through the Son.

Islam, with its Five Pillars of faith, frequent daily prayers, charity, fasting during Ramadan and pilgrimage to Mecca, is founded on revelations made by Almighty God, Allah, to Mohammed, the last of his Prophets, which are recorded in verse in the Holy Book, Quran. Muslims consider the Quran to be verbatim words of God and the unaltered, final revelation. This leaves even less room for questioning.

In contrast, the Buddha achieved everything by himself with no help from any higher source. Rebelling against some of the practices in the religion to which he was born and seeking a solution to the ever-pervading sense of dissatisfaction, Prince Siddhartha embarked on a journey of discovery that culminated in Enlightenment, under the Bodhi tree on the full moon day of the month of Vesak.

Hinduism, or Sanatana Dharma as traditionally referred to by followers, encompasses the concepts of Karma, Samsara, Moksha and Dharma with a creator Brahma, preserver Vishnu and destroyer Shiva. In addition, there are multitudes of gods serving various functions and there are ritual practices of Puja (worship), Bhakti (devotion), Yajna (sacrificial rites) in addition to meditation and Yoga. The one thing that has blighted Hinduism, on top of sacrifices, is the caste system. The uncompromising attitude of Brahmins led to the formation Sikhism as well, long after the establishment of Buddhism.

Prince Siddhartha studied under eminent teachers of the day, of which there were many, but realised the limitations of their knowledge. Having already given up the extreme of luxury, he went to the other extreme of self-deprivation which after a search for six years, he realised also was not the solution to the problem. Exploring through his mind he realised the truth and came up with the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path. He shunned extremes and proposed the Middle Path which seems to hold sway in many spheres of life, even today.

Buddha’s greatest achievement was the analysis of the mind and scientists are only now establishing the accuracy of the concepts the Buddha elucidated, not with the help of supernatural powers or sophisticated machinery at the disposal of modern-day scientists but by the exploration of the mind by turning the searchlight inwards.

Having discovered the cause of universal dissatisfaction and the path to overcome it, the Buddha walked across vast swathes of India, most likely barefoot, preaching to many, in terms they could understand, as evidenced by the different suttas illustrating the same fact in different ways; to the intelligent it was a short explanation but for others it was a more detailed discussion.

In sharp contrast to all other religious leaders, the Buddha encouraged discussion and challenge before acceptance. What the Buddha stated in the Kalama Sutta, acceptance only after conviction, laid the foundation for scientific thinking.

The Buddha, being a human not supernatural, never claimed infallibility as evidenced by his agreement with his father King Suddhodana that ordaining his son Rahula without permission was a mistake and took steps to ensure that this did not happen again. In fact, the entire Vinaya Pitaka is not an arbitrary rule book laid down by the Buddha, but are the rules the Buddha laid down for the Sangha, based on errant actions by Bhikkhus. Long before the legal concept of retroactive justice was established, the Buddha implemented it in the Vinaya Pitaka.

In an interesting video on YouTube titled “Nature of Buddhism”, Bhante Dhammika of Australia (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY8WfGJq2FI) discusses some unique aspects of Buddhism. Some religions are ‘high demand’ religions where the followers are required to strictly adhere to certain rules which is not the case in Buddhism and he opines that this has led to the gentleness of Buddhists, at times leading to even being lackadaisical! Interestingly, as a widely travelled person, he describes his personal experience of the change of people’s attitudes on going from places with Buddhist influence to others. Speaking of Sri Lanka, where he spent many years, he commends the traditional hospitality as well as lack of cruelty to animals. He refers to “Law based religions” where some things are compulsory whereas in Buddhism there is no compulsion. Buddha was not a lawgiver but recommended good behaviour, giving reasons why and encouraged thinking. Some religions are exclusivist, claiming that there is nothing in other religions. Buddhism is not and Bhante Dhammika refers to an incident where the Buddha encouraged a disciple who converted from Jainism to continue to give alms to his former Jain colleagues.

Have all these strengths of Buddhism become its weakness and the reason for the shrinking number of followers? Had Buddhism demanded more from followers would it have flourished better? Is the numbers game that important? These are interesting questions to ponder over and I am sure, in time, researchers would write theses on these.

Whilst total numbers may diminish in traditional Buddhist areas, more people in the West are recognising the value of the philosophy of Buddhism. Mindfulness, a concept the Buddha introduced is gaining wide acceptance and is increasingly applied in many spheres of modern life. Perhaps, what is important is not the numbers that practise Buddhism as a religion but the lasting influence of the Buddha’s concepts and foundations he laid for modern scientific thinking and analysis of the mind!

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

Features

Political violence stalking Trump administration

Published

2 days ago

2026/04/30

Sahan Weerasooriya

A scene that unfolded during the shooting incident at the recent White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington. (BBC)

It would not be particularly revelatory to say that the US is plagued by ‘gun violence’. It is a deeply entrenched and widespread malaise that has come in tandem with the relative ease with which firearms could be acquired and owned by sections of the US public, besides other causes.

However, a third apparent attempt on the life of US President Donald Trump in around two and a half years is both thought-provoking and unsettling for the defenders of democracy. After all, whatever its short comings the US remains the world’s most vibrant democracy and in fact the ‘mightiest’ one. And the US must remain a foremost democracy for the purpose of balancing and offsetting the growing power of authoritarian states in the global power system, who are no friends of genuine representational governance.

Therefore, the recent breaching of the security cordon surrounding the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington at which President Trump and his inner Cabinet were present, by an apparently ‘Lone Wolf’ gunman, besides raising issues relating to the reliability of the security measures deployed for the President, indicates a notable spike in anti-VVIP political violence in particular in the US. It is a pointer to a strong and widespread emergence of anti-democratic forces which seem to be gaining in virulence and destructiveness.

The issues raised by the attack are in the main for the US’ political Right and its supporters. They have smugly and complacently stood by while the extremists in their midst have taken centre stage and begun to dictate the course of Right wing politics. It is the political culture bred by them that leads to ‘Lone Wolf’ gunmen, for instance, who see themselves as being repressed or victimized, taking the law into their own hands, so to speak, and perpetrating ‘revenge attacks’ on the state and society.

A disproportionate degree of attention has been paid particularly internationally to Donald Trump’s personality and his eccentricities but such political persons cannot be divorced from the political culture in which they originate and have their being. That is, “structural” questions matter. Put simply, Donald Trump is a ‘true son’ of the Far Right, his principal support base. The issues raised are therefore for the President as well as his supporters of the Right.

We are obliged to respect the choices of the voting public but in the case of Trump’s election to the highest public position in the US, this columnist is inclined to see in those sections that voted for Trump blind followers of the latter who cared not for their candidate’s suitability, in every relevant respect, and therefore acted irrationally. It would seem that the Right in the US wanted their candidate to win by ‘hook or by crook’ and exercise power on their behalf.

By making the above observations this columnist does not intend to imply that voting publics everywhere in the world of democracy cast their vote sensibly. In the case of Sri Lanka, for example, the question could be raised whether the voters of the country used their vote sensibly when voting into office the majority of Executive Presidents and other persons holding high public office. The obvious answer is ‘no’ and this should lead to a wider public discussion on the dire need for thoroughgoing voter education. The issue is a ‘huge’ one that needs to be addressed in the appropriate forums and is beyond the scope of this column.

Looking back it could be said that the actions of Trump and his die-hard support base led to the Rule of Law in the US being undermined as perhaps never before in modern times. A shaming moment in this connection was the protest march, virtually motivated by Trump, of his supporters to the US Capitol on January 6th, 2021, with the aim of scuttling the presidential poll result of that year. Much violence and unruly behaviour, as known, was let loose. This amounted to denigrating the democratic process and encouraging the violent take over of the state.

In a public address, prior to the unruly conduct of his supporters, Trump is on record as blaring forth the following: ‘We won this election and we won by a landslide’, ‘We will stop the steal’, ‘We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn’t happen’, ‘If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.’

It is plain to see that such inflammatory utterances could lead impressionable minds in particular to revolt violently. Besides, they should have led the more rationally inclined to wonder whether their candidate was the most suitable person to hold the office of President.

Unfortunately, the latter process was not to be and the question could be raised whether the US is in the ‘safest pair of hands’. Needless to say, as events have revealed, Donald Trump is proving to be one of the most erratic heads of state the US has ever had.

However, the latest attempt on the life of President Trump suggests that considerable damage has been done to the democratic integrity of the US and none other than the President himself has to take on himself a considerable proportion of the blame for such degeneration, besides the US’ Far Right. They could be said to be ‘reaping the whirlwind.’

It is a time for soul-searching by the US Right. The political Right has the right to exist, so the speak, in a functional democracy but it needs to take cognizance of how its political culture is affecting the democratic integrity or health of the US. Ironically, the repressive and chauvinistic politics advocated by it is having the effect of activating counter-violence of the most murderous kind, as was witnessed at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Continued repressive politics could only produce more such incidents that could be self-defeating for the US.

Some past US Presidents were assassinated but the present political violence in the country brings into focus as perhaps never before the role that an anti-democratic political culture could play in unraveling the gains that the US has made over the decades. A duty is cast on pro-democracy forces to work collectively towards protecting the democratic integrity and strength of the US.