A society where the prevailing form of government is democratically elected and is accountable and responsible to the electors is prima facie an open society. "A society in which individuals are confronted with personal decisions" is known as an open society. In this society there is social mobility by competition among its members. Every individual is free to pursue his desired career, make economic gains and move up the social ladder. Whatever the faults, a democratic country is considered as an open society mainly because the citizens of that country do exercise freedom and have many personal rights making them all constitutionally equals. There is freedom of critical thought and discussion in all spheres of human activity. Such freedoms are considered as indispensable preliminaries to acting wisely. This open society will have constitutional as well as institutional barriers against the exploitation of man by man. "Our modern open societies function largely by way of abstract relations, such as exchange or co-operation". Most contacts and dealings are at arms length via the phone, internet and paper contracts. Face to face contacts are still there but minimal. The new faith of the open society is "the faith in man, in equalitarian justice and in human reason". Only such a society has the potentiality to fulfill man’s desire for personal enhancement, satisfaction and at least a modicum of happiness.

A closed society "resembles a herd or a tribe in being a semi-organic unit whose members are held together by semi-biological ties—kingship, living together, sharing common efforts, common dangers, common joys and common distress". Tribal exclusiveness prevails in a closed society and therefore this society will seek to shut out foreign influences which are condemned as inferior and degenerative. Universalistic humanitarian principles will be taboo but will be replaced by anachronistic tradition, old virtues aimed at arresting social change. Criticism and dissent have no place in this closed society. The tribe is everything and the individual is nothing, the collective stands higher than the individual. North Korea and the erstwhile tribal land of Pirapakaran are closed societies both in the literal as well as intellectual sense. The latter practiced romanticized gangsterism while the other extols the collectivist ideology above everything else. Closed societies are usually headed by tyrannical dictators who will suppress all dissent ruthlessly. A closed society is an outdated zoo with cages full of almost perfect monkeys.

Sri Lanka is no five-star democracy but it still is an open society even though there are many institutional imperfections, avoidable waste, untold human suffering due largely to corruption and parasitical life of the elite, many of whom are openly engaged in the crudity of money-grabbing, and of late, the homicidal efforts also have been engineered to arrest change by deliberate attack on the freedom of expression. It is still an open society, despite the mortal combat with a murderous closed society led by VP.

Who are the enemies of our fledgling open society? First and foremost has been the closed society of Pirapakaran(VP). Thankfully this danger is being physically eliminated by our courageous and valiant security forces. All Sri Lankans should remain forever grateful to the security forces for this liberation from the terrorists. We should stop giving prominence to VP, the gangster, after his capture or demise. He deserves to be treated only as a war criminal and a serial killer. We should turn our attention towards his closeted acolytes among the politicians, the Sinhalese managed NGOs and some foreign managed INGOs. They will seek to rob us of our victory over terrorism by peddling various seemingly attractive post conflict solutions. Without exception all their solutions would, if closely examined, turn out to be recycled sugar coated demands of VP aimed at bifurcating the country, if not immediately, in the future. They are certainly the behind-the-lines enemies of our open society. I challenge these dollar NGO mercenaries to take a hard look at the way people of all ethnicities live next to one another, love one another and work in co-operation as well as in competition in many major towns of our country. These people evince closer understanding, integration of interests, a life of common dependence and common sacrifice. There is no devolution or constitutional settlement here. They live as Sri Lankans, in Sri Lanka and for Sri Lanka while maintaining their individual ethnic identities. This is the live answer to our NGO pundits. Replication of this situation in conflict-torn areas should be urgently considered and relentlessly pursued.

Many Jaffna men and women live harmoniously and in peace in almost all areas of the country in the south. Why is such a mixed harmonious life not possible in Killinochchi, Paranthan, Mullaitivu and Jaffna peninsula? If racism could be discarded when traveling down to and settling down in Wellawatha, so it could be jettisoned at the Jaffna railway station or KKS harbour or Palaly airport itself. Peace is living with other fellow beings without strife and conflict. Exclusive enclaves lead to suspicion, jealousy and accusations of discrimination and favouritism of one over the others. A new north and east with many Wellawathas and Kotahena-like suburbs and villages in conflict cleansed areas would surely pave the way for all of us to be Sri Lankan first and whatever else after.

Then there are some foreigners with self-fabricated fancy theories such as R2P, Failed States and manufactured Human Rights Index. They wrap themselves with the fabric of Human Rights to dupe the unwary. These are identifiable enemies of our open society. Their secret objective is the destabilization of our country. They should not be allowed to operate in our country. The foreign saboteurs among them should be deported forthwith and the indigenous men and women should be arraigned for treason if this is possible.

The Rule of Law governs an open society. The law of the country is normally legislated and promulgated by a democratically elected body and is enforced by legally established agencies such as the Courts of Law and the Police department. Decisions and declarations made by the Courts are part of the law of the land and ought to be obeyed first, and then contested, if necessary, through the appeal procedure. All who disregard any determination of the Court of Law do become enemies of the open society. Their disobedience makes the country lawless, the society inequitable and creates a section within society with impunity to do whatever pleases them at the expense of others. They are wreckers trying to dismantle the very foundations of open society to usher in totalitarian dictatorship.

Religious bigots are another batch of enemies to open society. They not only try to prevent others from practicing their religions, but also try to enforce their religion and religious ethos on unwilling others. Economic inducements to convert the destitute and poor peasants are unacceptable. Equally resorting to heavy-handed law to prevent such conversions could only lead to more intractable problems. Toleration which is the hallmark of open society could be replaced by contentious division and conflict. We have in Sri Lanka, a religious section who wants to arrogate to their religion and ethnicity all victories of our security forces. They deliberately ignore the many patriotic Malays, Muslims, Tamils and Christians in the security forces that have died for the country and continue to die for the country. Now that Mullaitivu is under government control, I like to remind these bigots that in 1996 in a desperate attempt to save Mullaitivu, 275 elite commandos under the command of Lt. Col. A.F. Laffir were heli-dropped near Alampil under heavy fire from the LTTE, who had by then entered the army camp. Although wounded he led the attack from the front and died fighting the LTTE. Such brave men in our security forces who belong to minority communities stand insulted by our religious bigots. The President was right to call the victory by our security forces as victory of the whole nation. This in no way diminishes the major contribution expected of and actually and admirably made by the majority ethnic community in fighting the terrorists. Religious fanaticism in whatever form has a corroding effect on open society and should be scotched at the earliest as the President did immediately after the fall of Killinochchi by claiming it as the victory of the whole nation.

There cannot be an open society without freedom. Without freedom every man’s place in life, his civil and social rights and duties together with the security of earning his living would be determined by the status of his birth. I agree with J.S.Mill that without freedom, there will be no scope for spontaneity, originality, genius, for mental energy and for moral courage. Society will be crushed by the weight of collective mediocrity.

The spirit of an open society is the freedom for open discussion, criticism and compromise. A free press, a free radio and TV are therefore necessary for the open society to thrive and progress. These institutions act as barriers to the imposition of one man’s will on another. Therefore any physical extra-judicial attack by anyone on these agencies and its personnel is simply unacceptable. Such mindless scoundrels should be hunted down and suitably punished. They are all morons unable and unwilling to articulate and sustain their point of view in the public domain. Such men are both misologists (haters of arguments) as well as misanthropists (haters of men) fit only for living in a closed society. Every law is an infraction of freedom, nevertheless, laws should maintain maximum degree of non-interference compatible with minimum demands of social life. It is the sacred duty of any democratic government to act as the indefatigable watchdog to maintain this frontier un-invaded not only by itself but also by others. Failure here on the part of the government would be the death knell to open society. (All quotations are from Sir Karl Popper’s book; "The Open Society and its Enemies").