VORANAI VANIJAKA
Last week's commentary "Dearest Tom, Dick and Harry ..." has garnered plenty of responses, both in letters to Postbag from residents of Thailand and on our web site http://www.bangkokpost.com by the world-wide community (around 70% of visitors to our web site live abroad), which at last count had 279 comments.
The responses to Postbag have mostly been complimentary, but not without disagreement on certain points made in the commentary.
On the web site, however, the responses range from calling the commentary "brilliant", to "rubbish" and to downright "racist".
With the quantity and extremity of the responses, it was suggested to me by the Sunday Post editor that I should write a response to the responses. My answer was, "cool" (mostly because then I didn't have to think of a topic to write about this week).
But before getting to it, allow me to clarify the commentary in question. The commentary only addressed those with the habit of insulting Thailand, which I presume the majority of Bangkok Post readers are not guilty of. After all, Bangkok Post readers are a civilised, educated and intelligent lot. Therefore, one shouldn't take offence if one is innocent.
Also, when I used the term "guest", I do realise that many foreigners living here are residents - productive and valued members of society, and many of them probably understand and appreciate Thailand more than some of my fellow countrymen.
Perhaps the following phrase from last week wasn't clear: "For those who are understanding, we thank you." So hopefully the above explanation clarifies this.
It is also worth noting that, judging from the responses, foreign residents do have the understanding and decorum that perhaps some of those outsiders looking in do not possess, though we should understand that Internet forums are what they are - a fierce and ugly battlefield of anonymity. As such, the following will mainly address the responses from the web site.
Many responses called the commentary "xenophobic" and "anti-foreigner". The commentary itself refers to foreigners in two instances: Firstly, that many (but not all) view the situation in Thailand with disbelief, disdain and disgust, and package it into a barrage of insults hurled at, not just the PAD, but Thailand as a whole; and secondly, the piece concluded with the following statement: "Constructive criticisms are welcomed and appreciated, but beg your pardon, please do not insult us, especially if you are a guest in our country." With the term "guest" already clarified, the only thing I can say here is, if one is a lover of insults and a hater of constructive criticism, then I definitely understand the anger at my request for the latter and disdain for the former.
Many responses from both foreigners and Thais also condemned the commentary for siding with the PAD. This is quite perplexing, since the commentary clearly stated my disapproval of the PAD's leadership and their unsavoury tactics, but sympathised with the people who march. If you are not a Bangkok resident, you might not know that these are made up of members of the elite and the middle classes, as well as students and the grassroots. The commentary simply offered an understanding of their frustrations and anger with corrupt leaders, given the evolution of Thailand over the past 76 years, and was not attempting to excuse intransigent behaviours.
Many foreigners and Thais also took exception to the comment that the overwhelming majority of the Thai population are the grassroots, with little to no education. As such, they do not understand the concept of democracy.
That the majority of the Kingdom is the grassroots and lacking in education is simply a matter of fact. That they have graver concerns than to worry about democratic ideals is a matter of common sense. That the process of democracy suffers from this is a matter of unavoidable consequence. Investing in education and offering opportunities in life so that the majority would no longer be exploited by the powerful and the corrupt is the logical conclusion. And if the "logical conclusion" can be realised, then democracy can be nurtured.
Perhaps last week's message (asking the insulting critics not to judge Thailand's grassroots with disdain and disgust, but instead to try to understand their predicament in the context of the historical evolution of Thailand) wasn't clear enough. I hope now this is clear.
Finally, many responses stated that democracy is as simple as opening a dictionary, reading the definition and adapting to it. I humbly ask: How could one theoretical ideology that hinges upon human behaviour, the cultural and historical evolution of the hundreds societies in this dynamic world of ours, through the thousands of years of human history, be so easily defined by a dictionary?
Theory and reality are two different things. The difference lies in what democracy is, and how it can be adapted to Thailand, given the context of its people, culture and historical evolution.
On a related issue, there are those who brought up South Korea, saying that the country was able to adapt to "a healthy, though imperfect system of democracy" in a short period of time. So why can't Thailand? I would throw Germany and Japan into the equation also. The difference is, unlike those three nations, Thailand did not have the experience of getting blown to bits and built back up from scratch by Western democracies. Nor did we have the honour of being colonialised. That's why last week's commentary focused on the historical evolution of Thailand since 1932 in order to understand Thailand in 2008. It has nothing to do with South Korea.
Having said all that, allow me to apologise. Bangkok Post readers are an intelligent and educated lot. So if some readers misunderstood or misinterpreted, the blame is on the writer for not delivering a clear enough message. I hope everything is now clear.
Otherwise, I thank you all for taking my commentary into consideration, generating thought, debate and discussion.
After all, I don't claim to know the perfect formula for Thai democracy, but one thing I do know: Freedom of speech, the exchange of thoughts and ideas, debate and discussion, is a good step towards Thai democracy.
Prev
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Next
