OPINION

Great example

On Friday, Thairath hosted a debate on today's hottest topic: the nationwide student protests demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, among other things. Having watched the US presidential debates and the Thairath debate, I can confidently say that I learned a lot more from the Thai debate than either of the US debates.

The debate was successful because the participants -- MP Pareena Kraikupt and "Mind", the 25-year-old protest leader -- and the moderator, Jomquan Laopetch, were well-informed. Jomquan, for one, was a superb moderator, ensuring both sides had an equal opportunity to present their case. For example, when Ms Pareena repeatedly interrupted Mind, Jomquan gestured effectively to silence her.

Other Thai media outlets, as well as universities and high schools, should organise similar debates on the subject, so Thais everywhere can make informed decisions -- taking special care to choose knowledgeable and decisive moderators. If no one is deemed impartial enough, school directors should step into the role.

The power to run the country belongs to all Thais, so let's make our decisions informed ones.

Charging Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and Piyabutr Saengkanokkul with sedition will do nothing to quell the unrest; it will only make the students more determined.

The government doesn't seem to understand that the student demonstrators are not blind followers, but young people with their own ideas and aspirations. The protests have carried on despite the arrest of leaders such as Parit Chiwarak and Panusaya Sithijirawattanakul.

The government can continue arresting those they feel are leading the demonstrators, for understanding what is going on is beyond simply beyond their capabilities.

The generals live in a world of cronyism and patronage, so they can't understand the students who wish for so much more. It's ironic that this government, which is led by generals who seized power from a democratically-elected government in 2014, should be accusing others of sedition. That they don't see the hypocrisy in this proves how outmoded their thinking is.

Re: "Aswin says city ready for annual toxic dust deluge", (BP, Oct 28).

It is discouraging to read of the feeble preparations being made to combat PM2.5 in the coming months. No attention was given to agricultural burning or pollution from industrial factories. No mention was made of enforcing emission standards for personal vehicles. No plan was put forward to make mass transit more affordable. No strategy was proposed to accelerate the shift to less-polluting electric vehicles.

Instead, schools were told to avoid outdoor activities and warned that they may need to close when PM2.5 levels reach dangerous levels -- an apparent acknowledgement that the planned measures will be inadequate.

I notice with some dismay the use of the collocation "new normal" in the "Loy Krathong" (BP, Oct 30) report.

I find the use of this phrase somewhat insidious. What does it imply? That we are to be temperature-tested on entering shops and offices for the rest of humanity's existence? That for many generations hence, we will be walking around masked? Highly unlikely, surely. Once we have developed some degree of immunity to the virus or have been vaccinated against it, life will carry on largely as it had done in the past -- in the real normal.

However, I do feel that the phrase in question was rolled out far too quickly in the first instance, almost as if someone were preparing us, grooming us, even, for something to come. What other reason could there be for introducing such spurious language?