The dreadful and apparently escalating violence surrounding the political rallies was already bad enough. In recent days there have been a series of terrible examples where the dead and injured have been used as some sort of political symbol. The deep national divide has put many people in a lamentable state. Some are referring to the victims of the violence in political and propaganda terms. There is no place in our society for this. Friends do not allow friends to exploit terrible events for cheap political points.
A shocking example of this, but with a semi-happy ending, occurred on Sunday in Nakhon Ratchasima. A speaker trying to enthuse the meeting of red-shirt members and sympathisers heard news of the killings in Trat province. He applauded the violence when an anti-government protest was attacked by gunmen. He said the death and injuries were "appropriate punishment for loving Suthep Thaugsuban", leader of the protests against the government.
Within minutes, the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship chairwoman Tida Tawornseth grabbed the microphone to apologise. She and subsequent speakers said, correctly, that there can never be joy in such deaths. Ms Tida stressed that resistance must take the form of logic, speeches and compromise. Mr Suthep, for his part, promised to keep his People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) peaceful as well.
Some misguided social media users, however, had other, more impolite aims. There were many reports that users of Facebook, Twitter and the like have circulated photos of children killed last weekend in Trat and in the Ratchaprasong area of Bangkok. The photos were displayed for the purpose of stirring up political feeling and hatred. There were thankfully few such mainstream users. One Facebook account seen yesterday for example, displayed a gruesome photo of a child killed in the Ratchaprasong explosion on Sunday. The text with the photo was political and inflammatory.
Whoever posted that photo and comment has done a huge disservice to themselves, and to decent and proper human respect. They also have caused gross harm to Mr Suthep’s political cause, which they claim to support. Posting an explicit photo so publicly, of a dead child no less, says more about the poster than the political point which the poster was trying and failing to make.
On Monday, the UN Children’s Fund finally joined the calls, including from this newspaper, to keep children well away from the rallies. There are far too many parents who think it is cute to dress a child up in political colours and exhibit the innocent young person to friends and colleagues. Or there are others who want to attend the rally and can find no one to care for the children, so take them along.
These are unthinking parents, uncles and aunties, willing to use their children as decorations at rallies, while placing them in danger, not just from violence but from shifting crowds, dreadful and hateful language and in other ways. Even if the rally sites were completely safe, they are no place for young children.
Unicef’s Bangkok representative Bijaya Rajbhandari said every rally site should be a "child-free" zone. He is right. A parent with a strong political view or sense of civic duty can always find an activity to help his or her cause, away from the actual rallies. Children should be left at school or at home, with a relative or nanny. Similarly, tasteless and disrespectful exploitation of the victims of violence has no place in even the most passionate political discourse.