[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

Aung San Suu Kyi's Speech, Part 2



        Date: 26 Nov 94 900 JST
        From: NBH03114@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Reply-to:Conference "reg.burma" <reg.burma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
        To:Recipients of:<reg.burma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

EXTRACTS FROM EMPOWERMENT FOR A CULTURE OF
PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT
by Aung San Suu Kyi
For transmission, the following document has been divided into four
parts.

Part 2

Peace as a goal is an ideal which will not be contested by any
government or nation, not even the most belligerent. And the close
interdependence of the cultures of peace and development also finds
ready acceptance. But it remains uncertain how far governments are
prepared to concede that democracy and human right are indivisible
from the culture of peace and therefore essential to sustained
development. There is evidence that culture and development can
be made to serve as pretexts for resisting calls for democracy and
human rights. Moreover, it is widely known that some governments
argue that democracy is a western concept alien to indigenous
values; it has also been asserted that economic development often
conflicts with democratic rights and that the second should give way
to the first. In the light of such arguments, culture and development
need to be carefully examined and defined that they may not be
misused to block the aspirations of peoples.

While the concept of human development assumes a dominant
position in the thinking of international economists and
administrators, the Market Economy is increasingly regarded by
many governments as the quick and certain way to material
prosperity. It is assumed that economic measures can resolve all
problems.

The view that economic development is essential to peace, human
rights, democracy and cultural pluralism, and the view that a culture
of peace, democracy and human rights is essential to sustained
human development, may seem to differ only in the matter of
approach. But the difference in approach itself implies differences
of a more fundamental order.

When economics is regarded as " the most important key to every
lock of every door" it is only natural that the worth of man should
come to be decided largely, even wholly, by his effectiveness as an
economic tool. This is at variance with the vision of a world where
economic, political and social institutions work to serve man instead
of the other way round. The differing views ultimately reflect
differences in how the valuation of the various components of the
social and national entity are made; how such basic concepts as
poverty, progress, culture, freedom, democracy and human rights
are defined and who has the power to determine such values and
definitions.


/e