difference between community of Belgium and Sri Lanka
Answers
Answered by
5
Belgium
1.They adopted a policy of power sharing.
2. They gave equal powers to all communities.. minor or major doesn’t matter
3.It solved the problem.
SriLanka
1)They adopted a policy of Majoritarioism.
2) They gave preferences to the majority Sinhala group alone, disregarding the minority
3). It only increased the problem
please mark as BRAINliest answer
1.They adopted a policy of power sharing.
2. They gave equal powers to all communities.. minor or major doesn’t matter
3.It solved the problem.
SriLanka
1)They adopted a policy of Majoritarioism.
2) They gave preferences to the majority Sinhala group alone, disregarding the minority
3). It only increased the problem
please mark as BRAINliest answer
hornystudiers:
please mark as BRAINliest answer
it's easy
Answered by
0
The Belgian leaders recognised the existence of regional and cultural diversities.
(a) They amended their constitution four times so as to work out an innovative arrangement that would enable everyone to live together in peace and harmony, i.e., there was sharing of power between the Dutch and the French both in the central government; state government and community government. They followed a policy of accommodation.
(b) This helped to avoid civic strife and division of the country on linguistic lines.
(c) On the other hand, the Sinhalese who were in majority in Sri Lanka as compared to the Tamils followed a policy of majoritarianism and adopted a series of measures to establish Sinhala supremacy by passing an Act of 1956.
These measures alienated the Tamils leading to civic strife between the two communities.
We find that both Belgium and Sri Lanka dealt with the issue of power sharing differently. In Belgium, the leaders respected the interests of both linguistic groups and avoided any possibilities of clashes among the Dutch- and French-speaking communities. In Sri Lanka, however, the assertive policies of the majority community led to a civil war threatening the unity and integrity of the country
Hope it helps please mark it as brainliest
(a) They amended their constitution four times so as to work out an innovative arrangement that would enable everyone to live together in peace and harmony, i.e., there was sharing of power between the Dutch and the French both in the central government; state government and community government. They followed a policy of accommodation.
(b) This helped to avoid civic strife and division of the country on linguistic lines.
(c) On the other hand, the Sinhalese who were in majority in Sri Lanka as compared to the Tamils followed a policy of majoritarianism and adopted a series of measures to establish Sinhala supremacy by passing an Act of 1956.
These measures alienated the Tamils leading to civic strife between the two communities.
We find that both Belgium and Sri Lanka dealt with the issue of power sharing differently. In Belgium, the leaders respected the interests of both linguistic groups and avoided any possibilities of clashes among the Dutch- and French-speaking communities. In Sri Lanka, however, the assertive policies of the majority community led to a civil war threatening the unity and integrity of the country
Hope it helps please mark it as brainliest
Similar questions