Rights talk in a genocide: Myanmar as a lens for the problem of rights in Buddhist political thought

With their integration into the global political world, the historically Buddhist countries of Southeast Asia have begun to augment, sometimes to the point of replacement, their traditional political structures with Westernized political institutions. Despite these formal changes, far less developme...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPolitics, religion & ideology Vol. 24; no. 2; pp. 153 - 175
Main Author Sukala, Cory
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Abingdon Routledge 03.04.2023
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN2156-7689
2156-7697
DOI10.1080/21567689.2023.2216137

Cover

More Information
Summary:With their integration into the global political world, the historically Buddhist countries of Southeast Asia have begun to augment, sometimes to the point of replacement, their traditional political structures with Westernized political institutions. Despite these formal changes, far less development has been made as a matter of underlying political theory. Though the language of contemporary Buddhist political thought and action is colored with talk of rights, it remains unclear how firmly this new orientation is founded. The consequences of this mixture of Western democratic political forms built upon an underlying foundation of Buddhist political theory can be seen in the developing human rights crisis in Myanmar. On the subject of the Muslim Rohingya, advocates of Burmese democracy, such as Aung San Suu Kyi, have seemingly found common cause with the military junta, with the country's newly-minted democratic institutions proving themselves to be inadequate as a means of sustaining rights protections for the religious minority group. This paper examines the standing of rights-language in Buddhist political thought and how these concepts have thus far proven insufficient as a surrogate to similar conceptions in the liberal tradition as a foundation for political protections.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:2156-7689
2156-7697
DOI:10.1080/21567689.2023.2216137