In his Nov 7 article, "Start at the local level to avert apocalypse", Sawai Boonma asserted that real change in society can only come from the bottom, and he is right.
In Thailand, there is one person who is constantly vilified as the source of the unrest in the country, but he is only one man, one person.
As one individual human being, he has only the intrinsic power of one individual. His power is not from within himself, it comes from many thousands of other human beings who listen to his words and hero-worship him as a celebrity.
Former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's followers are his power. He is their comfort zone of apathy.
It requires effort and energy to learn; a desire to know, which stems from awareness and thinking.
In Thailand in particular, there would seem to be a reluctance - an aversion, in fact - to learning to bring about change.
There is an emotional block to change when a suggestion challenges habit and the accepted way of things.
In fact, suggestions for change are usually met with a scowl and/or strong opposition.
However, blind hero worship is not just something peculiar to Thailand. It is a universal trait.
Until people have a desire to open their eyes to reality rather than lie in the apathy of fantasy, there will never be worthwhile change for the better.
J C WILCOX
Nothing in common
I take exception to the following statement by Philip Cunningham: ''Ms Yingluck is Thailand's first female prime minister, a breakthrough in gender terms as delightful and surprising in its own way as Mr Obama's breakthrough as America's first black president.''
President Obama's list of accomplishments, not the least of which is the reform of America's health care system, is a long one.
In contrast, last year's floods were an unmitigated disaster and it was Ms Yingluck's responsibility to solve them. She failed.
She has signed off on a plethora of Pheu Thai measures which, in summary, are designed to simultaneously provide greater opportunities for corruption and further her party's popularity.
Her tenure in office has been paid for by her brother and her actions orchestrated by him and his advisers. There is nothing delightful and surprising about any of this.
Whether a prime minister or a president wears a dress or has black skin matters not one whit. What matters is the effectiveness and integrity they demonstrate in governing.
It just ain't English
Re: ''Propaganda flourishing in LOS'' (Postbag, Nov 18).
Mr Kitlertsirivatana's letter about propaganda is well taken. But this word ''propaganda'' did not always have the malignant and malodorous meaning that we attach to it today.
Mr Kitlertsirivantana mentions the Nazi minister for propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, and it is largely due to him that today the world propaganda conjures up negative reactions.
Originally it meant little more than the broadcasting or dissemination of information.
In the seventh century the Roman Catholic Church established the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda, primarly to carry information about the Catholic faith to new territories.
I liken the change in the meaning of the word propaganda to the changed meaning of the word ''sinister''.
Originally, sinister merely meant on the left, or left-handed. But in the middle ages left-handedness was considered a sign of witchcraft and therefore a sign of evil.
Thus, ''sinister'' is passed down to us today with its suspicious and malignant connotations.
Such is the English language in all its fascinating complexity.
CONTACT: BANGKOK POST BUILDING
136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110
Fax: +02 2403666 email: firstname.lastname@example.org
All letter writers must provide full name and address.
All published correspondence is subject to editing at our discretion.