Preachers' hypocrisy

re: "Is this the end for reckless populism?" (BP, December 4, 2020)

Dear editor,

What a joy to read Gwynne Dyer's piece setting out some honest truths about  authoritarian, law-and-order types. Such populist brutes are, by their very natures, morally suspect. They are often little more than brutish dictators dressed up in militaresque uniforms even if supposedly civil servants. And as the example of  Jozsef Szajer, the "ultra-nationalist, populist, authoritarian grouping that defends 'family values' and condemns homosexuality" shows us, such people are often remarkable for personal lives that flatly contradict their morally stunted preaching  about how others should live their lives. They offer simplistic solutions to complex problems, and in doing so not only lie about reality, but outlaw real solutions that are good for society. Naturally, vicious censorship is needed to protect the public myth from the threat of just exposure by the reality of the grossly self-indulgent lifestyles of such  preachers of chastity, simplicity, sufficiency, monogamy, marital fidelity, and like from becoming known and discussed as reality really should be.

As the protestors on its streets well know, exactly the same mismatch is all too common in Thailand. Look at the chasm between the pious preaching of monks who live in literally gilded temples whilst preaching sufficiency. And the sex lives of Thai monks are far too uncomfortably similar to that of Catholic priests and bishops preaching abstinence as they abuse children and the powerless under their control. But this is merely in the ostensibly sacred realm.

In the avowedly secular realm,  there is the regularly repeated Thai example of those who preach law and order, despite having overthrown the supreme rule of law, and in the current case, then having failed and persistently refused to make the oath of allegiance to "also uphold and observe the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand in every respect” (Thai Constitution, sect. 161). But in the land of no compromise, why would blatant hypocrisy stand out? Modern Thai history of the past 70 years at least teaches that such deceits, protected by unjust law made up for that purpose, are the normal superficial gloss of preaching good morals by those who would not know a good moral if it bit them.

To take one specific Thai example, look at Thaksin Shinawatra's ultra-nationalist excuses for his law-and-order authoritarian killing of thousands of Thai citizens. His drug war killings were evil that many others were complicit in. In fact, it is such things as his populist drug war  killings, with support from the morally compromised, that show Thaksin to have had and to still have today far more in common with the current Thai prime minister, who staged a coup to make himself PM, than he does with such eminently new people as Thanatorn, Move Forward and the protestors on the streets, who would no more want the authoritarian old-style Thaksin than they do his replacement in Prayuth. Naturally, those who ousted Thaksin did not care to press the charges of killing thousands in morally indefensible drug wars but instead made up silly political charges for which no nation will extradite. It's all most convenient and too traditionally Thai.

To conclude on a lighter note, as many Thais know every bit as well as healthy human beings everywhere, sex is a good thing. Enjoying sex with whoever and however is perfectly good. It is a morally sound way to enjoy life, provided only that all the parties concerned are adults, or at least mature teens, freely consenting to the joys being shared and no promise to another is being violated. It is the anti-pleasure, uptight religionists and other zealots who are morally wrong to condemn such natural pleasures as sex. But then, such morally and factually stunted types usually are wrong about almost everything, in heaven as on Earth, which they make hell. The more fervently they preach what they often decline to practice, the most morally rotten they are. As with Hungary's rightly embarrassed ultra-nationalist authoritarian, the gross contradictions between their preaching and their personal lives should be publicly exposed. In this regard, the Thai media has much to learn from the media of more developed, successful nations.

 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 December 5, 2020, under the title "Preachers' hypocrisy" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2030419/pm-is-in-denial