1.Sri Lankan government adopted majoritarian roles,. It ignored the intrest of the minority community ( tamils) and thus there wasn\’t equality in the country. 2.But Belgium was poopsite to SriLankans . It sought to promote equality in the country . There was equal representation of every community. 3. Both Sri Lankan and Belgium are democracies and they dealed with question of power sharing. Because the system of power sharing is different in both countries. 4. It shows us that the majority community want to force it\’s dominandominance over other and refuse to share power it can undermine the unity of the country. 5. In Belgium there is one special group or government called the community government. Based on religin caste and language issues. In ??Belgium there is no such discrimination But in SriLanka no major political parties are arranged and are sensitive to the language ang culture of Tamils.
Sri Lanka :- Sri Lanka was independent in 1948- Sinhala speaking were a mojority in the country…so to rule on the country they adopted a series of MAJORITARIAN in the country in order to spread there kingdom- Sinhala was known as the official lang. in 1956- This created a feeling of disrespect b/w the communities leading to a CivilWar in Sri Lanka.Belgium- Small Country in Europe- The French was a mojority but the Dutch people took over the govt. in the country- To resolve the prob. No. of Dutch people and French were given equal positions in the Constitution- No single community can take decisions by there own- Many powers of Central were given to State govt.- Brussels had a seperate govt.- Community govt. was formed were only one language community can belong. .\xa0
Power sharing must be practiced to maintain peace and equality in a country or a society