Righteous anger

re: "PM 'understands' students, warns them against bias" (BP, February 27, 2020)

Dear editor,

As I did, I suspect that the patriotic Thai students protesting for a better future for their nation did a double take when the PM piously intoned that "The most important thing is the law..."

This is the man, as the bright young students from Thailand's best schools and universities will well know, who, while honour bound to uphold and protect it, plotted against and then overthrew the supreme law of the Thai nation in 2014. His exhortation to respect the law from the man who has refused to comply with the explicitly written law in section 161 of the current constitution sends a perfectly clear message to the righteously protesting students.

And he wonders why the students and other good people of Thailand are angry at the blatant hypocrisy, prejudice and double standards that his unjust rule by law forces on the Thai nation. Nor are his thinly veiled threats the response of an ethical politician.

Peaceful, lucid, determined, intelligent, and informed, the protesting students inspire hope that the Thai nation does have a future. These brave Thai citizens have clearly put both their command of English and their smartphones to some very smart use to learn the unbiased reality about their nation's sad state.

 Felix Qui

_______________________________

The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.

The text as edited was published in PostBag on February 29, 2020, under the title "Righteous anger" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/1868274/righteous-anger
  

Immoral status quo

re: "Cops on alert for unrest at raft of rallies by students" (BP, February 26, 2020)

Dear editor,

It is encouraging that Thai youth no longer swallow the fake excuses, fake morals and corrupt examples of their elders disgracing the hallowed halls of parliament as they weaponize unjust law to thwart the democratic aspirations of the Thai people for a just society of citizens with equal rights to a voice in the determining the form of their society, its laws and its government. As the students rightly proclaim, the "sovereign power belongs to the Thai people" (Thai constitution, 2017, section 3.)

Some of those in the cabinet, none of whom have taken the oath of allegiance as explicitly required by section 161 of the current constitution, of the Prime Minister who made himself PM by overthrowing the previous supreme rule of law of the Thai nation, complete with giving himself a full amnesty, have suggested that Thai youth should get special lessons in morals in school. The obvious evidence, however, tells us that it is the youth of Thailand, those patriotic students now protesting for their nation's future, who are far better qualified to teach morals to the PM and his morally challenged government.

The students are right to be angry and to shout out their anger in strong, peaceful protests against the moral corruption of the status quo undermining their nation for too many decades.

 Felix Qui

_______________________________

The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.

The text as edited was published in PostBag on February 27, 2020, under the title "Immoral status quo" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/1866659/ruling-is-inconsistent
  

Proof before law

re: "Religious 'freedom' bill will divide Australians, not unite us" (The Sydney Morning Herald, 2020, February 27) 

Well reasoned and well said Michael Kirby. Religion is perfectly OK for determining how they choose to act in matters that concern only believers. As soon as others are affected, religious belief is not acceptable until its claims are solidly founded on objective, verifiable evidence. We allow the belief that life evolves to inform policy because that belief is solidly proven beyond any reasonable doubt, as are facts relating to the spread of viruses, which are relevant to restricting the right to free movement when a pandemic threatens.  But belief in ghosts, souls, gods, afterlives and the like should be totally ignored by the law unless and until such time as those beliefs are proven beyond reasonable doubt.

The last time I checked, no such supernatural belief had any solid supporting evidence at all, absolutely zero, and in most cases it was hard to see how it could even make sense; nonsense, whatever religious zealots might hold to to be obvious, is not in fact a sound basis for making law that governs a society. 

_______________________________

The above comment was submitted by Felix Qui to The Sydney Morning Herald article.

It is published there at https://www.smh.com.au/national/religious-freedom-bill-will-divide-australians-not-unite-us-20200225-p544bz.html#comments

  

Undemocratic, unjust

re: " Foreign hypocrisy" (BP, PostBag, February 25, 2020)

Dear editor,

In his letter, "Foreign hypocrisy", Thanin Bumrungsap makes good points, and has clearly taken the trouble to check his facts.

Nonetheless, he overlooks the basis for the Thai Constitutional Court's decision. It is not that Thai law puts any limits on loans to political parties, but that the court argued that they are public organizations, like the Ministry of Justice, rather than juristic persons such as the Bangkok Post Group or the Soi Dog Foundation. The relevant Thai laws make no mention of loans, unlike the explicit clarity of the relevant US laws, as Mr. Bumrungsap points out.

The comparison, therefore, fails. There is no hypocrisy in the democratic US calling out the undemocratic nature of the verdict by the Thai court, which all too likely fully comports with Thai law made up to enable such verdicts contrary to justice and democracy. Legal does not mean just; it certainly does not mean democratic.

 Felix Qui

_______________________________

The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.

The text as edited was published in PostBag on February 26, 2020, under the title "Undemocratic, unjust" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/1865869/lending-half-truths
  

Cut THAI to size

re: "THAI denies sales slump will force pay cuts" (BP, February 23, 2020) 

Dear editor,

While it is nice that its richly rewarded management "denies it is cutting staff salaries", Thai Airways International (THAI), that white elephant battening on the Thai economy, should be cut down to a respectable size. And Thai tax payers should be freed from the forced burden of feeding this greedy parasite on the nation.

 Felix Qui

_______________________________

The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.

The text as edited was published in PostBag on February 25, 2020, under the title "Cut THAI to size" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/1865084/foreign-hypocrisy
  

With thanks to the sainted 78ers

re: "Mardi Gras is not what it used to be, so I'll give it a miss" (The Sydney Morning Herald, February 28, 2020)

I wasn't a 78er, but celebrated Mardi Gras from the early 80s until 1989. It was magical.

So much has changed since those brave souls marched in 1978. They are saints, whose efforts to replace religiously enforced bigotry with awareness, justice and even acceptance lit a path for so many who followed, like me.

I have not lived in Australia for many years now, and am of an age when partying does not appeal as it used to, nor packed crowds, so would probably not go even if there, but I will always have those wonderful memories of learning to allow myself to be myself under the inspiring example set by the early apostles of Gay Liberation in Australia.

Thank you for the memories you have brought to mind.

_______________________________

The above comment was submitted by Felix Qui to The Sydney Morning Herald article.

It is published there at https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/mardi-gras-is-not-what-it-used-to-be-so-i-ll-give-it-a-miss-20200223-p543iu.html#comments

  

Unfounded beliefs

re: "Historic ruling offers pro-choice hope" (BP, Opinion, February 21, 2020) 

Dear editor,

Sanitsuda Ekachai is as succinct and compassionate as always in "Historic ruling offers pro-choice hope" (Bangkok Post, Opinion, February 21). There is no just reason why a woman should not be able to have a safe, legal abortion on request, without having to justify that often difficult and most personal decision to anyone save herself.

The traditional Thai Buddhist opposition, based solidly on unsubstantiated superstition, merely highlights yet again how far from the wise teachings of the Buddha the nationalistic religion known as Thai Buddhism is. Naturally, those who like to live by beliefs in souls and the like are perfectly free to choose not to have an abortion themselves, but just  law will not allow them to force their unfounded personal beliefs on others.

 Felix Qui

_______________________________

The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.

The text as edited was published in PostBag on February 22, 2020, under the title "Unfounded beliefs" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/1863084/unfounded-beliefs
  

What dreams may come

re: "Are ‘Near-Death Experiences’ Real?" (The New York Times, February 14, 2020)

It would be interesting to know what percentage of medical doctors make such wildly unwarranted claims about what the NDE evidence can credibly tell us about the supernatural, which is by definition supernatural.

Surely their medical training taught them to reason a little more rationally from evidence to theory, even outside their field of professional competence?

Is it only doctors who write populist books who seriously believe that there are souls floating around with some undetectable but real connection to our objectively actual physical selves, including brain activity? Does the interaction between the natural and the supernatural take place in the pineal gland, or do the physicians propounding these interesting metaphysical speculations have a better locus in mind than did Descartes?

_______________________________

The above comment was submitted by Felix Qui to the The New York Times article.

It is published there at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/13/opinion/near-death-experience.html#commentsContainer&permid=105218453:105218453

  

Built on blood

re: "'Don't blame army'" (BP, February 12)

Dear editor,

Behold! A shiny new meme is born this day!

But when he proclaims in his wisdom the Thai army a "sacred organization", has  the army chief been more honest than intended? Their shared etymology reveals the gruesome truth: the sacred has a long history of demanding blood sacrifices; rather, the high priests, the sacerdos, lust for the blood of innocents.

 Felix Qui

_______________________________

The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.

The text as edited was published in PostBag on February 14, 2020, under the title "Built on blood" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/1857224/hidden-in-plain-sight
  

Living in the past...

re: "A land being strangled by uniformity" (BP, Opinion, February 8, 2020) 

Dear editor,

Thank you Wasant Techawongtham for your thoughtful opinion piece on a too pervasive element of the forced conformity of traditional Thai society, at least as that fantastical past glory is fancifully imagined by nationalist myth makers in love with their vision of the past as seen in popular soap operas where all is lustrous silk.

Too many telling examples beyond the stultification embodied in school uniforms abound. As long as they wear the uniform, even heroin dealers and actual men who overthrew the nation's democracy with a constitutional monarchy are welcome in the hallowed precincts of Thailand's parliament. But a kiss that symbolizes love and progress is abhorred by the traditionalists intent on Thailand remaining as socially, politically, economically and morally stuck in a past as fake today as when it was made up to oppose democracy by the uniformly uniformed who initiated the seven-decades dark age of coup-installed dictators back in the 1950s. Their abiding fear of reform, of progress, of the good still stalks the Thai nation, their expensively tailored uniforms gaudily hiding the intrinsic corruption.

Perhaps the committee being proposed by Future Forward to look at long overdue reforms to the latest of Thailand's many permanent constitutions might usefully insert a clause that bans absolutely the wearing of any uniform, save civilly polite dress, by duly elected civil politicians along with banning the state from allowing civil servants to wear any uniform that remotely, and most inappropriately, in any way resembles a military uniform. Politely civil attire is most appropriate for teachers, postal clerks, and others, and of course politicians, who should all look like  members of the civil society they serve, not military wannabees.

 Felix Qui

_______________________________

The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.

The text as edited was published in PostBag on February 10, 2020, under the title "Living in the past..." at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/1854084/living-in-the-past-
  

No reason for nausea

 re: "The Age of Decadence" (The New York Times, February 8, 2020)

Perhaps the implications of the realities that began to emerge with the scientific revolution 500 years ago are slowly filtering through society. No invention hobbles that.

There cannot objectively be any greater meaning to a purpose driven life; the atoms that we are continue to swirl according to the laws of physics, as does the Earth. But this is no reason to despair.

_______________________________

The above comment was submitted by Felix Qui to the The New York Times article.

It is published there at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/07/opinion/western-society-decadence.html#commentsContainer&permid=105098199:105098199

  

Joy at cost of others?

re: "The Singapore model" (BP, PostBag, February 4, 2020)

Dear editor,

JC is right that Singapore has made impressive economic gains. It, nonetheless, has much to  improve in its respect for the rights of Singaporean citizens. Economic gains are important, but if the gains of some are at the cost of violating others, can that be acceptable to good women and men?

More recently than Churchill's 1947 comment on the superiority of democracy over every other form of government, the writer Ursula K. Le Guin explores these issues in stark outline in her very short story from 1973, "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas", which is well worth the few minutes it takes to read.

Is it really OK to keep an innocent child locked up alone in the dark of a filthy basement to ensure prosperity and joy for the rest of us that we may delight in the "clamor of bells that set the swallows soaring, the Festival of Summer came to the city Omelas, bright-towered by the sea"?

 Felix Qui

_______________________________

The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.

The text as edited was published in PostBag on February 5, 2020, under the title "Joy at cost of others?" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/1850784/prevention-better
  

The best form of rule

re: "Democratic letdown" (BP, PostBag, January 31, 2020)

Dear editor,

If I might briefly respond to a couple of Torontonian's misunderstandings in "Democratic letdown," the first is his straw-dog argument that I or anyone else is so silly as to argue that democracy solves all problems. No, democracy cannot and does not promise to "rid Thailand of corruption" or totally solve any other problem. Others might, but democracy makes no such extravagant claim.

It is true as he points out that many "in western societies feels let down by their democratic systems." But this dissatisfaction, however strong, does not entail that any other system is or could be better. That cancer patients greatly dislike the common side effects of their treatment does not mean that any other available treatment is preferable.

Torontonian is probably familiar with Winston Churchill's famous characterization of democracy as "the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time ..." (1947). It is worth repeating why Churchill was right. Democracy is necessarily better than every other system because it is the only political system premised on the ideal, ever imperfectly realized as history attests, that all citizens have a voice in determining the form of their society, its government and its laws. No other political system can even claim to respect that basic human right to having a say in consenting to how and by whom you are governed.

 Felix Qui

_______________________________

The above letter to the editor is the text as submitted by Felix Qui to the Bangkok Post.

The text as edited was published in PostBag on MonthDate, 2020, under the title "The best form of rule" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/1848209/the-best-form-of-rule