OPINION

Let's be rational

Re: "BBC is bullying Thailand", (PostBag, Dec 18).

Vint Chavala seems a type-case illustration of the dangers of the psychology of the sacred and taboo.

Sacred values, by definition, cannot be assessed dispassionately and even the act of bringing rationality to bear upon them is considered a violation by loyalists.

Taboo thinking involves pure emotion. When taboos are violated, rage buttons are immediately pressed and it becomes extremely difficult to step back and examine the issue with a cool head.

When Vint Chavala refers to "the Western world's effort to attack Thailand" and "intimidating powers" before making a plea on behalf of "we Thais", he seems to have allowed taboo psychology to lead him into the foggy realms of conspiracy theory. I would urge him to stand back and let rationality shed some light on these issues.

Re: "BBC is bullying Thailand", (PostBag, Dec 18).

It would be interesting to know if Vint Chavala has actually read the BBC article with its "unverified and manipulated rumours that hurt Thailand's image".

I have, and I saw very little that could cause real damage of any kind outside of the illusionary image he is protecting. If he has read it then he is as guilty as the young man who has been arrested for just passing it along. If he hasn't then he doesn't know what he is talking about.

The other obvious point here is, I wouldn't have gone looking for that article if the Thai government hadn't brought it to my attention. Maybe Mr Vint should be looking at all the things that really do damage the countries image: coups, corruption, nepotism and disappearing dissenters.

I have read a number of articles in the Bangkok Post on how schoolteachers think they are superior.

Recently, my wife said a teacher had told her our 8-year-old son needed a haircut. When I pointed out that it was only 50 days since he had had his head shaved with a No.2 razor, my wife said, "It's the law in Thai schools".

Really? What page of the statute book is that on? Or is it covered by Section 44?

I shall continue to grow my beard in protest.

Re: "Temple's lawsuits mount, but DSI stumped on raid", (BP, Dec 17).

Wat Phra Dhammakaya's director of communications said that the plan by police to cut off power and water supplies to the temple would be a form of torture and a gross violation of human rights. It is believed that the temple may have generators and artesian wells supplying it with power and water.

As all the numerous threats totally fail to faze the temple leaders, why bother with them? Just go ahead without issuing all these ultimatums.

It would be smart for US President-elect Donald Trump to transfer the administration of his assets to a blind trust before assuming office in January, instead of keeping it within his family.

When Thaksin Shinawatra became Thailand's prime minister in 2001, he made a big mistake by keeping all his businesses and assets management within his family, instead of allowing a trust to manage them for the sake of transparency. Many Thais started to distrust him from that moment on.

In response to Eric Bahrt's letters on the American election, I quote "he who is without sin cast the first stone".

With my tongue firmly embedded in cheek: Of course America has never interfered or influenced any political process in the world. Never backed coups or despots around the world!?

Re: "Unfair pension system", (PostBag, Dec 17).

The letter hits the nail on the head. On a recent visit to the UK I was surprised to be informed by the Pension Office that I would receive £130 pounds (5,800 baht) per week while there, but on my return to Thailand, £60 per week. Fairness? Why am I worth less in Thailand than England?