OPINION

Liberty of speech

Re: "Different systems," (PostBag, Dec 19) and "MPs set poor example," (Editorial, Dec 19).

Two takeaways from Edmund Burke (on liberty) support both draft reform and the citizen military positions. Burke held that individual liberty depends on institutional liberty.

Institutions having liberty from outside influence can justly guard individual liberties by treating all citizens equally, regardless of their outside wealth or standing.

Mr Qui's letter, "Different systems", lays out his ideal institutional draft system. One where "all are required to do the same form of military service", all are equally and universally drafted. Burke would love it, as do I. Equally as valuable are Mr Qui's many suggestions on how to reform the military draft.

But then, Mr Qui condemns my call to reform the draft and not to end it. He declares that I appear to support the present "oppressive" draft system.

Likewise, Mr Qui damns my call to form a democratic citizen-military, a military that respects the liberty of democratic institutions. Mr Qui dismisses the citizen military idea as a system which does not exist in Thailand.

How does my call to "democratically" reform the present draft, support the present "oppressive" draft? How am I supporting the present military system, when I call for creating a democratic citizen military to replace the present authoritarian system? This is all illogical and irrational.

The second Burke takeaway: The goal, of liberating government institutions from interference, is achieved by a bit-by-bit struggle for reforms. "The complexities of human nature and society" will not allow institutions to be justly built from revolutionary scratch; steady reform does the job.

The Dec 19 editorial is a wonderful display of this reform struggle in action. BP confronts parliament with fiery criticism for having failed democracy.

Stalwartly telling truth to power, shaming parliament, holding the representatives accountable in a bit-by-bit reform struggle to make a just institution, one free from corrupting interference.

Given its push to reform parliament, maybe the BP can reconsider abandoning reform of the military draft; especially knowing that abolishing the present draft, and replacing it from scratch, ensures an undemocratic replacement outcome.

It may be time for the Post to either discontinue the online forum or at least get better content moderating.

Your disclaimer specifically states what is and isn't allowed in posts which includes obscene, immoral, racist, duplicate, and libellous comments. The forum has become a place where sexual innuendo, libel and obscene comments have become commonplace. Multiple accounts belonging to certain individuals dominate the posts and the idea of a place where rational people can exchange ideas. While free speech is a cornerstone of democracy, your disclaimer does make it quite clear to everyone, except your moderators, what can and cannot be posted.

Re: "Scam ring victims return from Cambodia," (BP, Dec 22).

I am not suggesting all casinos/hotels in Cambodia are unethical, but Thais should be aware of the pitfalls when they look for jobs across the border.