OPINION

No 'moral clout'

Re: "Asean's 'centrality' faces growing threat", (Opinion, June 17).

When it comes to governance there are huge gaps in the "code of conduct" in member states of Asean. Excepting for Singapore, and to some extent Indonesia, all other countries in the bloc often flout the "rule of law". Thailand is in a precarious position as it does not have any moral clout to lead the block. It is fair to say that China with its economic emergence is adopting the American ideology that "might is right".

If America can assert its power beyond its own borders why not China? Asian countries are accustomed to being used as pawns in the chess game of mighty powers. In the past century, it was Japan versus the Western world; in this new century it will be China versus the rest of Asia. The watered-down joint statement against China by the 10-member Asean block is indicative of a hollow centrality created by a lack of leadership in the bloc.

I would like to bring to people's attention the labour abuse of university students as interns or trainees or both. I wholeheartedly agree with the concept and benefit to students, if properly administered, but, more often, they are used as free staff in small hotels and guesthouses.

I use the term abuse not casually. Students have no recourse with their school. (No Thai student would dare question a teacher or school official). No Thai student would dare question a boss even though they are not paid.

There are guest houses that operate exclusively with interns, without any staff or onsite management. They work 12 to 15 hours a day, seven days a week. My only involvement was when a shop owner told me they complained, but had no recourse.

They are obligated to 800 hours of trainee course and, unless the boss signs off, they get no credit for course at uni (for which they are paying). The previous staff was also 100% trainees who did complain and students were allowed to return to school only to be replaced with "staff" from schools in different provinces.

My question is: Is this standard operating procedure within the system, or a closed eye between the labour authorities and the universities. Either way, it appears as exploitation.

Re: "Academic waxes lyrical over Royal Anthem", (BP, June 16).

In this news report, a certain "renowned professor" wants the government to pay 100 million baht to impose a standard version of the Royal Anthem (his own) on this country. This makes me embarrassed on behalf of all Thai artists.

For one thing, there is a long tradition of creating imaginative, beautiful arrangements of the Thai Royal Anthem, and no tribute to this country could be more touching than the gift of a new arrangement that reflects the incredible pool of creativity this country has to offer. A gorgeous arrangement by Trisdee na Patalung now plays in some cinemas, and there was an incredibly moving one by Bruce Gaston that was prevalent for a while.

I heard a lovely semi-improvised one for Thai traditional instruments by Ajahn Boonyong Ketkhong as a child. The idea of making new arrangements of the anthem first came about in the 1960s when Hans Gunther Mommer wrote a new, Bach-like arrangement for the Pro Musica Orchestra.

People were stunned by its classical complexities, and certain harmonic elements from this arrangement became so standardised that they appeared in other arrangements.

A few years ago, I went down to my living room and discovered award-winning jazz composer Kijjsak Triyanond at my piano. He was improvising a version of the anthem with extraordinary jazz harmonies, taking it on a flight of wild imagination and inspiration -- a version never to be heard again as he was simply improvising at the piano.

Arranging a country's anthem is a tradition that important composers do and have done throughout history. The US anthem has had numerous brilliant arrangements as varied as Jimmy Hendrix's or the numerous jazz renditions that are done. Recently, the Siam Sinfonietta played my own arrangement of the US Anthem in Carnegie Hall and many there too, opined that it was the "most beautiful arrangement of the Star Spangled Banner they had ever heard. I did not then immediately start saying other versions shouldn't be played!

I feel very strongly that the idea of creating one standard arrangement, and spending enormous resources to do so, is a slap in the face to creative artists who want to express their love of this country and the monarchy with all the diversity of talent and colour that is possible. The concept goes against everything that we mean by "art" and would impose totalitarian values on our beautiful culture.

Re: "DSI turns tail without a fight", (BP, June 17).

The DSI's retreat to avoid physical confrontation with temple followers is understandable. But the arrest warrant must be executed. It is necessary to remove those followers out of the site before the planned arrest.

Seal off all outside traffic and cut all utility supplies to the temple. Issue an order for them to leave, and those who resist should be charged with obstructing the authorities on duty.

Most of those followers cannot continue their sit-in at the compound for two to three weeks. After that it will be easier to search for and arrest the abbot.

Perhaps the UK government could take a leaf out of Thailand's book, by adopting their wildly innovative and popular policy of composing an incredibly infectious ditty for any campaign being undertaken, that everybody would be singing or humming along with in double quick time.

In the case of the UK referendum, they have a ready-made anthem in the Clash's Should I Stay Or Should I Go.

All together now!

Bernie Hodges

Re: "NCPO backs 15-year free education", (BP, June 16).

Thank you for extending free education from 12 to 15 years.

This is a first step in helping students, many of them from poorer families.

It's good to know someone out there cares.

Now, it will be up to the students to stay in school.

You should make these education years mandatory, with no excuses for dropping out except under severe extenuating circumstances.

Eric Bahrt often complains about personal attacks on himself.

In his June 16 letter he calls another correspondent ignorant and disparages the writer's mentality.

As long as Mr Bahrt fails to realise that it's not so much what he says, but the way in which he says it, he will continue to be "attacked" as he puts it.

When he can put up a coherent argument when he disagrees with another's opinion, and manages to resist his ad hominem style, he might, but not necessarily, get some degree of respect, as we are all entitled to express our opinions, whether or not they differ from his own.

Somehow it is difficult to comprehend John Wells' comments regarding firearms under pillows (Re: "Firearms aren't funny", June 17).

Perhaps Americans chose to kill themselves off with firearms.

In England the population dies off because the elderly cannot afford proper housing.

Pensions are being cut, and the medical system sometimes fails so many.

It's attrition in its own way.

As for facial hair being a fashion, that too is a rather disputable opinion.

A well-kept trim beard on a properly attired person looks wonderful.

A beard on an unkempt person who prides himself in his sloppiness looks like someone sleeping in a doorway on skid row.

Funny looking hats may be a tradition, but they are still funny looking and very entertaining, and, admittedly one duchess, (or princess), looked rather ridiculous with what looked like a giant, half-hollowed orange on her head with a twist of peel to top it off.

Now that was indeed funny, tradition or not.

Ridiculous fashions are indeed laughable, no matter who wears what, and where.

Re: "Anti-Brexit MP stabbed, shot to death in England", (Online, June 17).

It was a terrible tragedy that Jo Cox, a 41-year-old pro-EU British member of parliament and a mother of two, was murdered in broad daylight on Thursday by a gunman. The London murder happened just a few days before Britain goes to a referendum to decide whether the country will leave or remain with the European Union.

This horrific murder should serve as a warning to all of us Thai people -- who are campaigning for and against the constitution draft, ahead of a referendum scheduled for August 7 -- not to raise tensions without ample reasons.

It might cause provocation and lead to big trouble for the country.

Those who are convinced that the charter draft is good should wait to cast their votes on that day. Likewise, those who are against it should not try to cause trouble or violence at this stage.

A referendum is different from an election in that it deals with a decision on which direction the country is bound to take.

Once such a decision has been made, all of us are duty-bound to respect and follow it -- regardless of whether we like it or not.

And that is democracy in its true sense of the word.

It's disappointing to learn that dairy "has slowly worked its way into everyday meals" in Thailand ("Milking it for all it's worth", BP, June 12) because cows' breast milk, like human breast milk, is produced solely for the nourishment of a mother's newborn baby.

It is not designed for babies of other species and it is certainly not designed for adults of other species.

But it is what dairy farmers do to obtain this milk that is so abhorrent. Each year they force cows to give birth but, as soon as their beloved babies are born, they tear them from their mothers' side, so they can steal their milk for profit.

Instead of the calf drinking his mother's milk, as nature intended, the distraught and grieving mothers are hooked up to machines that pump the milk from their udders so that it can be sold to humans who have absolutely no need of it. This cruel cycle continues until the mother's milk supply wanes, due to exhaustion, and she too meets the same cruel fate.

Re: "Westbrook harden to skip Rio Games", (BP, June 12).

Allow me to address these sports babies that refuse to represent their country in the Rio Olympics, because they are afraid of mosquitoes.

Do you know for sure if the US has banned anyone entry to the US because they hold a Brazilian passport? Is it just not possible that a Brazilian can enter the US, and just possibly visit the area where you live? Do you still feel safe because you are refusing to go to Rio?