NM has been paid a great compliment to be compared with Darwin.
Now for a Farang criticism of Thailand. More than 60 years ago a pleasant and promising young man, well educated in Switzerland was invited to take the throne of Thailand. After 60 years of grovelling and corruption from upper-class Thais, he now heads an institution whose political party is repeatedly rejected at elections by the majority of Thais. The institution retains its political power by using brute military force against its own people, and by imprisoning those who dare to speak of liberating their country from its clutches.
Interesting to see the similarity in the “us” vs “them” in Thailand and in Malaysia.
In Thailand it is enlightened Buddhist vs crude farangs.
In Malaysia, the same narrative is provided by the ruling party (UMNO Muslims) against anyone who demands for the rule of law or human rights and freedom.
To UMNO, these people are inevitably supported by “farangs” = decadent Western powers, Zionists, Christians, Gays/Lesbians, who promote human rights and freedom to destroy the Malay institutions of Islam, the Malay Royalty, the Malay language.
I think the racial aspect is being twisted. “Certainly, farang regard themselves as superior to other races.” Blanket and invalid. Same as saying all Thais do the same thing – this might be closer to fact but is still untrue.
However, Thais have been inculcated with the idea – and have been conditioned to adopt a national pastime of enshrining one another with it – that they are superior and unique; further, that they possess the same properties imbued in the parental regime – that is, they are near-perfect, unique and above criticism. Why else park on both sides of a narrow road and block off a full lane of traffic? Why else are they afraid of speaking to one another directly lest violence break out over a relatively simple act of disregard for the rest of society? Why else must they make laws prohibiting criticism, and compound that by not providing protection to anyone from police and court action should they rightly feel they have a legitimate right to speak? The current system is made for control, not decency. It is maintained for separation, not for homogeneity. It is protected so it does not change, not to protect anyone other than those who stand above the rest.
Xenophobia is not the sole right of foreigners…or natives. Ignorance is widespread and because skin color and culture apparently differentiate the stupid from the knowing, or the “true Thai” from the “not real” one does not mean that is true.
Over the long term, conformity and retention of ancient ways is what is being pitted against progressive thinking and the prohibited-in-Thailand (and by Thai law around the earth!) right to self-determination. Some day we will not easily find artisans who compare with those of today. At the moment, though, they are being preserved by archaic anti-democratic forces that want to preserve one thing above all else – their own power. That they have woven that power through a sacred fabric is a grievous fault and grievously will be people of Thailand keep answering for it.
I hate this ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ relativity, Somchai is simply playing the ideological role of the ‘thai’ created through nationalistic policy and cultural indoctrination in opposition and defense against the other, farang, colonialist ect. While critiquing the “farang” about how they generalize about Thai society, he;s ironically doing the same thing by using ‘farang’ to describe an entire demographic of people and there views, an extreme generalization. Of course – many colonial powers committed terrible acts in the past, as did the thai government and even the royalty, but thats all it should be, history and we should learn from it, instead of let it direct our opinions in bitter resentment like an old family feud. I think were entering into an exciting new age of history, or one could say ‘the end of history’ like fukuyama, where a new individual is emerging, the globalized ‘person’ whom now has the power to free him or herself from the chains of history, a category somchai obviously doesn’t fall under, enabling him/her to think morally unconstrained by the past.
Ah Kong may or may not be guilty of the crime he has been convicted of. I don’t know and I cannot know because I am not privileged to read the emails that his conviction is founded on.
But I do know that three men were executed in 1954.
Despite the fact that just about everyone acknowledges that these executions were unjust, there has been no official pardon.
“Charles Darwin who wrote Origin of Species that evoked racism in the Western world, said that the white race has the most potential to attain progress beyond the yellow and black.”
— huh? Darwin said no such thing.
Mr. Somchai– please go back and re-read Darwin’s texts.
[…] the Thai government should simply shut down sites like Facebook in Thailand (for more on this see New Mandala). The government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, which came into office in July seeming […]
I have to draw attention to one very important aspect of farang evil ways forgotten in the essay. Certainly, farang regard themselves as superior to other races. One hidden means to maintain a grip not only on the people and their resources, but even more so over their thinking, is to lure the poor natives to come into their schools and universities for intensified brain-washing. The poor victims come home like zombies, completely alienated. They lost their moral virtues and are unable to continue with a decent Thai life. How successful they are in this is that the victims even pay these universities that insult their home-cultures, values, norms and beliefs a considerable amount of money!
The Thai have to become aware again about their own cultural roots and strength and focus on what is important for them, not on farang materialism, moral decadence etc. Instead of going to foreign schools and universities like ANU it would be far better to go into the monasteries, temple schools and learn about what really counts for a successful life!
I’m no farang, which made this article even funnier since I’m a regular here. So if a Thai (with “Sila” whatever that is) criticized another Thai’s idea, is it acceptable then?
There we can see that this article is without explanation accompanied by photos from the Kings 60th anniversary celebrations in 2006, when “nearly one million Thais wearing yellow shirts flocked into Bangkok for the King’s first audience in six years”
Some nice pics of Tong Daeng on the next page also.
Caution : When first linking to http://www.thaioz.com.au my anti-virus sw disabled a high risk malicious cookie from the site :-O Be prepared. Maybe they can detect us NM readers from afar 😉
So will NM respond to ThaiOz with a reasoned rebuttal of this rather muddled attack on NM & ANU ?
I don’t want to defend European colonialism, and I will not, as I too am very critical of European colonialism, but at the same time it should be remembered that the Siamese also have a long history of discriminating against others peoples, including the Lao, Khmer and various ethnic minorities. Thais often think about the ways Europeans tried to dominate them, but rarely do they recognise that they too have often been guilty of discriminating against others, many of whom think of the Thais as the neighbourhood bully.
Without entering in the debate about the fairness or unfairness of the sentences of Khun Arkong or Mr Joe Gordon , something that in the opinion piece is not discussed at all, we can see how the whole article is understandable only within the hegemonic discourse of “Thainess” as defined by scholars as Saichol Sattayanurak, Thongchai Winichakul or Michael K. Connors. According to them, “Thainess” is the elite-incensing discourse at the base of the hierarchical, unfair and violent structure of Thai society. Such pro-elite narrative has been constructed by the elite itself and then successfully injected into the broad public through decades of indoctrination, resulting in a society where sections of subaltern classes enthusiastically support the very structure which determines their own subalternity. The opinion piece signed by Khun Somchai Menyaem fits weel into this royalist and ultra-Nationalist ideology of Thainess. The author follows a well known path:
1) build a cultural difference between 2 constructed categories: “farang” (a broad unclear category of non-Thai) and “Thai”. It is unclear here if the two categories and the two characteristics attached to them (“Farang’s characteristics” and Thai characteristics) are cultural or genetic. I don’t think they can be genetic, because both “farang” and “Thai” are hardly considerable pure races. So, if they are cultural, i.e. manmade by someone, this means they can be learned, taught, contested, opinioned, changed. As the Lord Buddha said, “nothing ever remains the same”. (Also “farang” philosopher Heraclitus, pretty much at the same time, was saying such things as “there is nothing constant but change”, or “everything flows, nothing stands still”). By the way, Khun Somchai is accusing New Mandala (NM) of lack of understanding and colonial thinking which comes from NM “non-Thainess” and NM background of “farang” colonial history. But what about Thai critiques as Dr Pavin Chachavalpongpun? Have they been contaminated by foreign non-Thainess while living abroad? Have they lost their “Thainess”? If “Thainess” is cultural, should they be considered “farang” by now?
2) frame the discourse within the constructed Bangkok history. Unfortunately for Khun Somchai, Bangkok-made history is not necessarily the real history. In poor words, the Bangkok-made history is a simplistic history where all good comes from the Royal Palace and all evils come from abroad. This operation has been already criticized by academics as Thongchai Winichakul (Siam Mapped, 1994). But following elite-constructed mainstream history, Khun Somchai writes of “farang with colonial thinking remnants”. Actually, first, it is academically problematic to say that each “farang” has a colonial history behind (what about a Swiss, Finnish, Slovenian, Luxembourger, Polish or Albanian “farang”?); second, it is academically problematic to demonstrate that all “farang” opinions are contaminated by such “colonial background”; and, third, Khun Somchai ignores that Thongchai explained how Siam and France “were rival expansionists contesting for the same prey” (Siam Mapped, p. 148). Therefore, Khun Somchai should be careful… “colonial thinking remnants” may be inside himself too! Ironically for Khun Somchai, the difference between Bangkok and Paris, it seems to me, is that since then Paris left its colonies and France official history condemned colonialism. In the case of Bangkok, instead, I don’t think the army and police is going to withdraw from Pattani any soon, nor is mainstream history going to recognize the “voice of those tiny states which were never born later as nations” (ibid., p. 147).
Moreover, Khun Somchai says: “Farang… historical process that experienced human rights abuse, slavery, discrimination against other human fellows as low class animals. ” In reality, obviously and undeniably, Thai history experienced HR abuses, slavery and discrimination too. (Note that, paradoxically, Khun Somchai’s critique is against “farang” who stance against violation of HR in Thailand! But he does so by justifying Thai HR abuses with Thai exceptionalism while at the same time by accusing “farang… historical process that experienced HR abuse”!!)
Again: “Farang therefore know how to exploit others.” In reality, exploitation existed and exists in Thailand too. For example, Sakdina Chatrakul Na Ayudhaya writes that “the lack of continuity in democratic rule in Thailand resulted in the maintenance of a conservative political culture where values concerning freedom and equality of human beings in society are not widely accepted” (in “The Thai Labour Movement”, October 2010). To Khun Sakdina, “exploitation” of Thai workers come exactly from the Thai conservative tradition, where HR are not accepted and therefore “discrimination” is accepted. In Khun Somchai’s eyes, Khun Sakdina must be one more “Thai” turned “farang”.
3) consider non-nationals unable to understand national issues and culture as well as all nationals supposedly do (“foreigners who don’t know much about Buddhism”). Is Khun Somchai sure that the problem of NM lack of “mind restrain” and “calm of mind” comes from NM ignorance of Buddhism? So how come that Khun Somchai, which we take for granted is such a great connoisseur of Buddhism to be able to teach it to others, fails into the same trap of insulting other human beings (“cowardly”, “stupid”, “have no wisdom”, “intellectual masturbation”) while the Lord Buddha himself place the “right speech” at the cornerstone of his Doctrine?
We Thais need to stop believing in the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus. And we also need to stop arresting and throwing into our nasty prisons anyone, farang or Thai, who doesn’t believe in the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.
Perhaps a better grasp of English would have helped, however the real problem is that a few valid points makes not a compelling philosophical treatise.
“It is the training to maintain three holy principles or “Traisikha”. The are sila, samadhi, and panya (self-restraint, consciousness, and wisdom)…”
Mmmmm… So it was ‘consciousness and wisdom’ that turned Taksin into a Squarehead, continually slandered and ridiculed Samak even when he was dying of cancer, found ways to justify killing over 90 people in April/May 2010, and, a couple of weeks ago put a sick 61 year man in jail for comitting LM…
If these are the results of ‘trained’ conscious minds exercising self-restraint I dread to think what the results of senseless stupid ones are…
I wonder how long it will be before a copy of this appears in my inbox. One thing Thais with ‘wisdom’ and ‘self restraint’ seem to be very good at is forwarding these kind of opinion pieces (which the recievers/readers often take as being absolute fact…) and spreading them around…
I agree with ynot. Although the author of the letter picks lots of the low-hanging, ‘strange fruit’ of hypocrisy and intolerance in farang history, when I get to end I cannot help but notice the argument to ‘control’ the discussion. I may have missed it but…
” Instead of proposing their ideas with a proper psychological means, they insult two prominent persons who are called “father” and “mother” by people around the kingdom.”
… I have never noted anyone insulting ‘two prominent persons who are called “father” and “mother” by people around the kingdom’, although I have noticed lots of people exposing the hypocrisy and terrorist tactics of their self-appointed priesthood.
The Islamic Taleban create taboo subjects that will bear no discussion, and the Xtian and Jewish Taleban do as well. Not having a ‘Heavenly Father’ whose will to interpret, whose offenders to punish, the Thai Taleban create an earthy, “Heavenly Father”, one who objected to such characterizations of himself in his ‘birthday speech’ of 2005 I might add, and yet they continue to use him as their idol whose will they alone may interpret, and to punish those they alone may deem to be his offenders.
It’s the same thing wherever and whenever a sacred talisman is set up by a priestly class… in the West we presently have the Law of Free Market for Capital… one whose wisdom, as divined and relayed to the people by the priesthood, cannot be questioned but whose transgression must be punished.
Depending on the strength of the hold of the belief system on the populace it is meant to control the punishment for heretical acts may range from simple ridicule, shunning, or banishment to brutal forms of execution meant to cause the most ‘exquisite’ pain and to elicit the most pitiful reactions from those executed, see the Dominican Inquisitors in Spain, all to enforce the ‘respect’ for the cult among the populace. That is to terrorize them into obedience.
It is not a stretch to compare the various Taleban of Western religious history and the Buddhist Taleban of Thailand, in my opinion. There are striking correspondences. It’s not that farang cannot uderstand the Thai mind or culture, it’s that we understand it all too well.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
NM has been paid a great compliment to be compared with Darwin.
Now for a Farang criticism of Thailand. More than 60 years ago a pleasant and promising young man, well educated in Switzerland was invited to take the throne of Thailand. After 60 years of grovelling and corruption from upper-class Thais, he now heads an institution whose political party is repeatedly rejected at elections by the majority of Thais. The institution retains its political power by using brute military force against its own people, and by imprisoning those who dare to speak of liberating their country from its clutches.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
Andrew,
perhaps you could extend an invitation to K. Somchai to debate his article on NM.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
Interesting to see the similarity in the “us” vs “them” in Thailand and in Malaysia.
In Thailand it is enlightened Buddhist vs crude farangs.
In Malaysia, the same narrative is provided by the ruling party (UMNO Muslims) against anyone who demands for the rule of law or human rights and freedom.
To UMNO, these people are inevitably supported by “farangs” = decadent Western powers, Zionists, Christians, Gays/Lesbians, who promote human rights and freedom to destroy the Malay institutions of Islam, the Malay Royalty, the Malay language.
How ironic!
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
I think the racial aspect is being twisted. “Certainly, farang regard themselves as superior to other races.” Blanket and invalid. Same as saying all Thais do the same thing – this might be closer to fact but is still untrue.
However, Thais have been inculcated with the idea – and have been conditioned to adopt a national pastime of enshrining one another with it – that they are superior and unique; further, that they possess the same properties imbued in the parental regime – that is, they are near-perfect, unique and above criticism. Why else park on both sides of a narrow road and block off a full lane of traffic? Why else are they afraid of speaking to one another directly lest violence break out over a relatively simple act of disregard for the rest of society? Why else must they make laws prohibiting criticism, and compound that by not providing protection to anyone from police and court action should they rightly feel they have a legitimate right to speak? The current system is made for control, not decency. It is maintained for separation, not for homogeneity. It is protected so it does not change, not to protect anyone other than those who stand above the rest.
Xenophobia is not the sole right of foreigners…or natives. Ignorance is widespread and because skin color and culture apparently differentiate the stupid from the knowing, or the “true Thai” from the “not real” one does not mean that is true.
Over the long term, conformity and retention of ancient ways is what is being pitted against progressive thinking and the prohibited-in-Thailand (and by Thai law around the earth!) right to self-determination. Some day we will not easily find artisans who compare with those of today. At the moment, though, they are being preserved by archaic anti-democratic forces that want to preserve one thing above all else – their own power. That they have woven that power through a sacred fabric is a grievous fault and grievously will be people of Thailand keep answering for it.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
I hate this ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ relativity, Somchai is simply playing the ideological role of the ‘thai’ created through nationalistic policy and cultural indoctrination in opposition and defense against the other, farang, colonialist ect. While critiquing the “farang” about how they generalize about Thai society, he;s ironically doing the same thing by using ‘farang’ to describe an entire demographic of people and there views, an extreme generalization. Of course – many colonial powers committed terrible acts in the past, as did the thai government and even the royalty, but thats all it should be, history and we should learn from it, instead of let it direct our opinions in bitter resentment like an old family feud. I think were entering into an exciting new age of history, or one could say ‘the end of history’ like fukuyama, where a new individual is emerging, the globalized ‘person’ whom now has the power to free him or herself from the chains of history, a category somchai obviously doesn’t fall under, enabling him/her to think morally unconstrained by the past.
Thailand’s Fearlessness: Free Akong
Ah Kong may or may not be guilty of the crime he has been convicted of. I don’t know and I cannot know because I am not privileged to read the emails that his conviction is founded on.
But I do know that three men were executed in 1954.
Despite the fact that just about everyone acknowledges that these executions were unjust, there has been no official pardon.
It remains a mystery.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
“Charles Darwin who wrote Origin of Species that evoked racism in the Western world, said that the white race has the most potential to attain progress beyond the yellow and black.”
— huh? Darwin said no such thing.
Mr. Somchai– please go back and re-read Darwin’s texts.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
What a terrible understanding of Darwin…and Marx, and, well…
(I was also curious who translated this from Thai???)
Mallika Boonmetrakul: an appalling Thai Politician
[…] the Thai government should simply shut down sites like Facebook in Thailand (for more on this see New Mandala). The government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, which came into office in July seeming […]
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
I have to draw attention to one very important aspect of farang evil ways forgotten in the essay. Certainly, farang regard themselves as superior to other races. One hidden means to maintain a grip not only on the people and their resources, but even more so over their thinking, is to lure the poor natives to come into their schools and universities for intensified brain-washing. The poor victims come home like zombies, completely alienated. They lost their moral virtues and are unable to continue with a decent Thai life. How successful they are in this is that the victims even pay these universities that insult their home-cultures, values, norms and beliefs a considerable amount of money!
The Thai have to become aware again about their own cultural roots and strength and focus on what is important for them, not on farang materialism, moral decadence etc. Instead of going to foreign schools and universities like ANU it would be far better to go into the monasteries, temple schools and learn about what really counts for a successful life!
Thailand’s Fearlessness: Free Akong
Still no word on HM the King’s freeing AhKong from the clutches of his evil tormentors?
What are we to think of HM the King if he does not (or is unable to?) free AhKong?
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
I’m no farang, which made this article even funnier since I’m a regular here. So if a Thai (with “Sila” whatever that is) criticized another Thai’s idea, is it acceptable then?
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
This article together with the complete newspaper is available online at
http://issuu.com/thaiads/docs/thaioz_issue570
There we can see that this article is without explanation accompanied by photos from the Kings 60th anniversary celebrations in 2006, when “nearly one million Thais wearing yellow shirts flocked into Bangkok for the King’s first audience in six years”
Some nice pics of Tong Daeng on the next page also.
Caution : When first linking to http://www.thaioz.com.au my anti-virus sw disabled a high risk malicious cookie from the site :-O Be prepared. Maybe they can detect us NM readers from afar 😉
So will NM respond to ThaiOz with a reasoned rebuttal of this rather muddled attack on NM & ANU ?
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
I don’t want to defend European colonialism, and I will not, as I too am very critical of European colonialism, but at the same time it should be remembered that the Siamese also have a long history of discriminating against others peoples, including the Lao, Khmer and various ethnic minorities. Thais often think about the ways Europeans tried to dominate them, but rarely do they recognise that they too have often been guilty of discriminating against others, many of whom think of the Thais as the neighbourhood bully.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
Without entering in the debate about the fairness or unfairness of the sentences of Khun Arkong or Mr Joe Gordon , something that in the opinion piece is not discussed at all, we can see how the whole article is understandable only within the hegemonic discourse of “Thainess” as defined by scholars as Saichol Sattayanurak, Thongchai Winichakul or Michael K. Connors. According to them, “Thainess” is the elite-incensing discourse at the base of the hierarchical, unfair and violent structure of Thai society. Such pro-elite narrative has been constructed by the elite itself and then successfully injected into the broad public through decades of indoctrination, resulting in a society where sections of subaltern classes enthusiastically support the very structure which determines their own subalternity. The opinion piece signed by Khun Somchai Menyaem fits weel into this royalist and ultra-Nationalist ideology of Thainess. The author follows a well known path:
1) build a cultural difference between 2 constructed categories: “farang” (a broad unclear category of non-Thai) and “Thai”. It is unclear here if the two categories and the two characteristics attached to them (“Farang’s characteristics” and Thai characteristics) are cultural or genetic. I don’t think they can be genetic, because both “farang” and “Thai” are hardly considerable pure races. So, if they are cultural, i.e. manmade by someone, this means they can be learned, taught, contested, opinioned, changed. As the Lord Buddha said, “nothing ever remains the same”. (Also “farang” philosopher Heraclitus, pretty much at the same time, was saying such things as “there is nothing constant but change”, or “everything flows, nothing stands still”). By the way, Khun Somchai is accusing New Mandala (NM) of lack of understanding and colonial thinking which comes from NM “non-Thainess” and NM background of “farang” colonial history. But what about Thai critiques as Dr Pavin Chachavalpongpun? Have they been contaminated by foreign non-Thainess while living abroad? Have they lost their “Thainess”? If “Thainess” is cultural, should they be considered “farang” by now?
2) frame the discourse within the constructed Bangkok history. Unfortunately for Khun Somchai, Bangkok-made history is not necessarily the real history. In poor words, the Bangkok-made history is a simplistic history where all good comes from the Royal Palace and all evils come from abroad. This operation has been already criticized by academics as Thongchai Winichakul (Siam Mapped, 1994). But following elite-constructed mainstream history, Khun Somchai writes of “farang with colonial thinking remnants”. Actually, first, it is academically problematic to say that each “farang” has a colonial history behind (what about a Swiss, Finnish, Slovenian, Luxembourger, Polish or Albanian “farang”?); second, it is academically problematic to demonstrate that all “farang” opinions are contaminated by such “colonial background”; and, third, Khun Somchai ignores that Thongchai explained how Siam and France “were rival expansionists contesting for the same prey” (Siam Mapped, p. 148). Therefore, Khun Somchai should be careful… “colonial thinking remnants” may be inside himself too! Ironically for Khun Somchai, the difference between Bangkok and Paris, it seems to me, is that since then Paris left its colonies and France official history condemned colonialism. In the case of Bangkok, instead, I don’t think the army and police is going to withdraw from Pattani any soon, nor is mainstream history going to recognize the “voice of those tiny states which were never born later as nations” (ibid., p. 147).
Moreover, Khun Somchai says: “Farang… historical process that experienced human rights abuse, slavery, discrimination against other human fellows as low class animals. ” In reality, obviously and undeniably, Thai history experienced HR abuses, slavery and discrimination too. (Note that, paradoxically, Khun Somchai’s critique is against “farang” who stance against violation of HR in Thailand! But he does so by justifying Thai HR abuses with Thai exceptionalism while at the same time by accusing “farang… historical process that experienced HR abuse”!!)
Again: “Farang therefore know how to exploit others.” In reality, exploitation existed and exists in Thailand too. For example, Sakdina Chatrakul Na Ayudhaya writes that “the lack of continuity in democratic rule in Thailand resulted in the maintenance of a conservative political culture where values concerning freedom and equality of human beings in society are not widely accepted” (in “The Thai Labour Movement”, October 2010). To Khun Sakdina, “exploitation” of Thai workers come exactly from the Thai conservative tradition, where HR are not accepted and therefore “discrimination” is accepted. In Khun Somchai’s eyes, Khun Sakdina must be one more “Thai” turned “farang”.
3) consider non-nationals unable to understand national issues and culture as well as all nationals supposedly do (“foreigners who don’t know much about Buddhism”). Is Khun Somchai sure that the problem of NM lack of “mind restrain” and “calm of mind” comes from NM ignorance of Buddhism? So how come that Khun Somchai, which we take for granted is such a great connoisseur of Buddhism to be able to teach it to others, fails into the same trap of insulting other human beings (“cowardly”, “stupid”, “have no wisdom”, “intellectual masturbation”) while the Lord Buddha himself place the “right speech” at the cornerstone of his Doctrine?
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
We Thais need to stop believing in the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus. And we also need to stop arresting and throwing into our nasty prisons anyone, farang or Thai, who doesn’t believe in the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
Perhaps a better grasp of English would have helped, however the real problem is that a few valid points makes not a compelling philosophical treatise.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
5555++++
“It is the training to maintain three holy principles or “Traisikha”. The are sila, samadhi, and panya (self-restraint, consciousness, and wisdom)…”
Mmmmm… So it was ‘consciousness and wisdom’ that turned Taksin into a Squarehead, continually slandered and ridiculed Samak even when he was dying of cancer, found ways to justify killing over 90 people in April/May 2010, and, a couple of weeks ago put a sick 61 year man in jail for comitting LM…
If these are the results of ‘trained’ conscious minds exercising self-restraint I dread to think what the results of senseless stupid ones are…
I wonder how long it will be before a copy of this appears in my inbox. One thing Thais with ‘wisdom’ and ‘self restraint’ seem to be very good at is forwarding these kind of opinion pieces (which the recievers/readers often take as being absolute fact…) and spreading them around…
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
I do not know why these people treat the RF members as their parents and use the rationale to back up LM.
Haven’t you ever criticized your own parents?
Yes, I love my mum and dad.
Yes, I am Thai.
But, I am happy for my parents to be criticized!
I have criticized them a lot but they did not change.
It will save me time if other people can do it for me.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
I agree with ynot. Although the author of the letter picks lots of the low-hanging, ‘strange fruit’ of hypocrisy and intolerance in farang history, when I get to end I cannot help but notice the argument to ‘control’ the discussion. I may have missed it but…
… I have never noted anyone insulting ‘two prominent persons who are called “father” and “mother” by people around the kingdom’, although I have noticed lots of people exposing the hypocrisy and terrorist tactics of their self-appointed priesthood.
The Islamic Taleban create taboo subjects that will bear no discussion, and the Xtian and Jewish Taleban do as well. Not having a ‘Heavenly Father’ whose will to interpret, whose offenders to punish, the Thai Taleban create an earthy, “Heavenly Father”, one who objected to such characterizations of himself in his ‘birthday speech’ of 2005 I might add, and yet they continue to use him as their idol whose will they alone may interpret, and to punish those they alone may deem to be his offenders.
It’s the same thing wherever and whenever a sacred talisman is set up by a priestly class… in the West we presently have the Law of Free Market for Capital… one whose wisdom, as divined and relayed to the people by the priesthood, cannot be questioned but whose transgression must be punished.
Depending on the strength of the hold of the belief system on the populace it is meant to control the punishment for heretical acts may range from simple ridicule, shunning, or banishment to brutal forms of execution meant to cause the most ‘exquisite’ pain and to elicit the most pitiful reactions from those executed, see the Dominican Inquisitors in Spain, all to enforce the ‘respect’ for the cult among the populace. That is to terrorize them into obedience.
It is not a stretch to compare the various Taleban of Western religious history and the Buddhist Taleban of Thailand, in my opinion. There are striking correspondences. It’s not that farang cannot uderstand the Thai mind or culture, it’s that we understand it all too well.