A political stunt?

re: "10,000 Buddhist monks in Hat Yai for mass alms offerings" (BP, August 20, 2023) 

Dear editor,

With all the fuss over religion recently inspired by the literally newest god on the block, the visually stunning image of the now most famous Khru Kai Kaeo, I'm not sure of the wisdom of promoting the ostensibly Buddhist event at Hat Yai, duly "presided over by Somdet Phra Maha Vajiramangalachan, chief of the southern Buddhist sector, with Maj Gen Pakorn Chantarachota, commander of the 42nd Army Circle, in attendance." Such details paint it as being, at least in part, an overtly political stunt. Lest there be any reasonable doubt whatsoever of the solidly political aspect of this "traditional event", it is further reported that a portion of "the alms given to the monks would be further distributed to ... soldiers on duty". 

As if that were not enough, there is also the, admittedly honest, footnote that "the activity was also intended to boost tourism in Songkhla, particularly Hat Yai city." I had not realized that indulging the hearty desire to make money was such a pillar of the religion known as Thai Buddhism. One wonders, however, what the Buddha would make of this use of his teachings for political show and financial gain. Perhaps a suitably gilded statue can be erected to counter any possible bad karma by presenting the faithful with another traditional means to make merit. 

 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 August 26, 2023, under the title "A political stunt?" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2636271/a-political-stunt-

Respect all citizens

re: "‘Pride’ watch seizures challenged in Malaysian court" (BP, August 23, 2023) 

Dear editor,

Whilst not in any cheerful, gay or otherwise happy colours, Malaysia's government paints Malaysians as snow flakes of extra special delicateness. Could it is true, as their government warns, that attractively colourful watches “may harm … the interests of the nation by promoting, supporting and normalising the LGBTQ+ movement that is not accepted by the general public”? 

Perhaps the Malaysian government should worry more about the prevailing bad public morals that fail to respect equally all Malaysian citizens, including the usual percentage who are LGBTQ+. Merely being a majority consensus inherited from less morally developed ancestors does make an ugly prejudice less rotten. 

 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 August 25, 2023, under the title "Respect all citizens" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2635701/rules-for-thee

re: "After Ballot Losses, Where Does the Anti-Abortion Movement Go Next?"

re: "After Ballot Losses, Where Does the Anti-Abortion Movement Go Next?" (The New York Times, August 21, 2023)

Does the radical anti-abortion zealot have any reason for thinking that there is inherently any reason why abortion is intrinsically morally wrong? What qualities is an unborn human baby supposed to have that make it somehow radically different to the unborn baby of  a chimpanzee, pig, dog, rat or any other of our near relatives? So far as I know, there is no such quality. None. 

There is nothing wrong with abortion. 

There is, however, a lot that is wrong with treating the bodies of women as something that others, such as radical zealots running on unreflective, unreasoning, inhuman faith in a blinded and blinding ideology, should control above any right to personal autonomy of a pregnant woman. 

 

_______________________________

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

It is published there at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/21/opinion/kristan-hawkins-abortion-republicans.html#commentsContainer&permid=127171547:127171547 

Political expediency

re: "Edging towards a moment of truth" (BP, Opinion, August 21, 2023)  

Dear editor,

Veera Prateepchaikul asserts "that flip-flopping or breaking promises is an integral part of the Thai political game" as if this were equally true of all parties. It is not. He then goes on to talk of "the new radicals represented by the Move Forward Party (MFP), who are bent on radical changes and structural reform, and the Old Guards, who are determined to maintain the status quo and are represented by many of the other parties." This is indeed the division that the senate and Pheu Thai have clarified for us.

Move Forward has, in contrast to tradition, consistently demonstrated that it does not flip-flop or betray those who vote for it. On the contrary, Move Forward, unlike the Old Guard, which includes the senate bent on holding the voters of no account, has acted with honour, integrity and principle throughout. More than one third of Thais already supported Move Forward on May 14. 

The Old Guard, as Veera dubs them, having been publicly exposing themselves these three months, it is likely that sufficiently more voters have now had their eyes opened that Move Forward already has solid majority support for every one of its modest, reasonable and long overdue proposals for reform of the bad old ways of the Old Guard propping up bad old traditions allegedly revered. At least, the Old Guard would have it believed such are revered. They conspicuously present zero evidence for their worst such allegations of reverence. The 38% vote for Move Forward on May 14 is, however, telling. Would that be 72% today? Or only the 60+% suggested by recent Nida polls? 

As for Thaksin Shinawatra and the long prophesied second coming, since it would incur only loathing from the people he has betrayed to grant him one, would anyone be so rash as to even consider giving Thaksin a pardon? What reason could there be for committing such an act? Why taint  your reputation by publicly enabling him after the Pheu Thai shenanigans this past month? I suspect that Thaksin's manicurist will call him to an urgent appointment. Still, I might, as always, be wrong, and Veera's bombshell might yet come to pass this Tuesday. That would indeed be a spectacle to set rumour speculating, and Move Forward soaring to new heights of respect in 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 August 24, 2023, under the title "Political expediency" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2634973/thaksin-redux

Between the lines

re: "Political drama peaks" (BP, Editorial, August 22, 2023) 

Dear editor,

How fittingly sarcastic of the Bangkok Post to write that "It is hoped that senators will make a fair decision" regarding the vote on the shameful Pheu Thai's nominee for the post of prime minister. Or is the editor suffering severe amnesia? 

Were the senate capable of making "a fair decision" on the appointment of Thailand's next prime minister, Pita Limjaroenrat would already be the prime minister of Thailand in a government led by Move Forward. Has it somehow escaped the Post's notice that this is not in fact the reality even in Thailand? If, fresh from betraying its voters, the Pheu Thai nominee wins the senate's approval, that endorsement can only prove that Pheu Thai's nominee is not in fact a fair choice for prime minister. It will then have to be wondered what unspeakable deals have been done with whom to have enabled such a travesty of democracy, such a rejection of justice, such a betrayal of Thai voters. 

 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 August 23, 2023, under the title "Between the lines" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2634321/between-the-lines

Lofty thoughts

re: "No conscience" (BP, PostBag, August 17, 2023) & "Denmark on heightened alert after Koran burnings", (BP, August 4)

Dear editor,

I agree with Don McMahon that both social conscience and intention matter in determining law in democracies.

Even for reasonable people, however,  judging intent is a little more complicated. There is no doubt that those who burned the Koran did so with intent. They fully intended to perform that act. Reasonable people will likely also hold that they knew that act must "inflame, [and] stir up emotions." Anyone who burns a US flag in Washington to make a statement knows the same. And yet the US Supreme Court consistently upholds that the law protects such acts, even  against popular efforts by well-intended law makers who would criminalize such an offensive act. 

There is a distinction to be drawn between knowing that some result might follow and intending that result. A Koran can be burned with the intention of demonstrating that it is just one more book made of paper and ink, having no more magical quality than any other book ever produced. A Koran can be burned intent on expressing that the burner does not believe in its particular god. A Koran can be burned to intentionally dissent from the perceived bad morals it preaches. None of these intentions entail a further intent to "cause civil unrest," even if the actors know that such a consequence is likely. No more is it my intention, even though I know it is a certain result, to worsen global warming when I take a fossil-fuelled taxi to Paragon to buy unagi flown in from Japan. 

This is where social conscience becomes relevant. Our conscience pricks us to do what is right against our wishes, attitudes, and inherited prejudices. The bedrock of democracy is not mob rule by majority opinion. What sets democracy apart is the principle that each individual counts equally as an individual. This is why democracies respect human rights, even when a majority personally dislike something like same-sex marriage.  In particular, each individual person in a society has an equal right to a voice in forming the cultural mix out which that society elects it government. This is why free speech is foundational to democracy. This is why social conscience demands that Koran burning, like flag burning and making bonfires of other sacred vanities be not merely permitted but actively protected by the law.

Denmark and Sweden set the democratic example of respecting social conscience by legally protecting Koran burning and similarly peaceful, albeit deeply offensive, expressions of opinion. 

 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 August 20, 2023, under the title "Lofty thoughts" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2632445/down-with-the-devil

It's beyond reason

re: "Civic groups press for relocation of bizarre statue" (BP, August 17, 2023) 

Dear editor,

The Artists Council for the Promotion of Buddhism of Thailand demonstrates a flawed understanding of the Buddha's teachings if they think that merely because something "went against Buddhist teachings" could be grounds to abolish or suppress it. Bangkok and the rest of Thailand is full of churches, cathedrals, mosques, meat selling markets and restaurants, and no end of other things that are at least as "against Buddhist teaching" as is the rather ugly, bizarre in fact, statue of the deity Khru Kai Kaeo. The Artists Council for the Promotion of Buddhism of Thailand might find more constructive ways to promote Buddhism than an intolerance that seems itself to contradict the Buddha's ideals of reason and example rather than brute force, including brutish legal force. 

The statue and its prescribed worship are no more superstitious than any other bit of religious teaching or practice touching on supernatural matters. When it comes to the supernatural, every religious claim is, without exception, exactly as well-evidenced as every other such claim. The teachings attendant on Khru Kai Kaeo are as sacred as any and on that score as deserving of the same respect accorded any other equally well substantiated sacredness. Why wouldn't they be? The sacred is, after all, the sacred, however scary of visage and divine command. 

Those who find such things distasteful are free to ignore the crimson manicured Khru Kai Kaeo or point out that it's all a bit beyond reason, but that is as far as their horror may justly go. Those finding it a source of comfort for whatever reason should be allowed to exercise their faith provided they not cause or threaten actual harm to others, including innocent puppies, or pigs, neither of whom appreciate being sacrificed to human desires for blood-soaked self-indulgence. 

Meanwhile, those who are "gripped by fear" should get a grip and take a more rationally informed, more Buddhist, approach  to such nonsensical beliefs as ghosts, spirits, demons, gods and other such perfectly unsubstantiated fantasy. 

But before this latest god on the block is cast into the darkness whence all such derive, what sacrifice does  Khru Kai Kaeo require to deliver Thailand from the curse being cast by Pheu Thai, the senate, UTN and the rest of that most unholy alliance against the will of the Thai people as manifest on May 14 and since? Those gargoyles being gathered into the warm embrace of the Pheu Thai family are the truly scary ones stalking the land. 

 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 August 19, 2023, under the title "It's beyond reason" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2632127/its-beyond-reason

Blatant injustice

re: "Charter court rejects pro-Pita petitions" (BP, August 16, 2023) 

Dear editor,

The Constitutional Court's dismissal of the petition consistent with the wishes of 63% of the Thai people (Nida poll, July 16) that Pita Limjaroenrat be renominated to serve their nation in the position of prime minister is too much in accord with entrenched tradition to surprise.

To further their own determination to hold to privileges of dubious desert, Thai law and its lawful institutions set up by conservatives to that end again proves itself a powerful force for blatant injustice in strict accord with that law itself. 

 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 August 18, 2023, under the title "Blatant injustice" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2631575/targeted-handouts

Popularity counts

re: "Senate to play pivotal role" (BP, Editorial, August 14, 2023)

Dear editor,

Thailand's senate should perhaps heed the wise words of a great mathematician, logician, philosopher and public intellectual from last century. Bertrand Russel wrote in 1943 that "If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do" (An Outline of Intellectual Rubbish). This is why, for all their possibly sincere posturing, neither the senate nor any other similarly insistent zealot dares invite open dialogue on their peculiar excuse for rejecting Move Forward's popular leader Pita Limjareonrat.

That excuse is not merely peculiar, it is not something that any rational, moral person can take seriously. To claim that a group of people revere some object, whether a person, a painting, an institution, a sacred text, a custom, or whatever, is a factual claim about the objective world. Such claims require evidence. For claims about about public attitudes or opinions, that evidence must be open dialogue and polls of public opinion conducted so that dissenting answers can be freely given. The perfect absence of any such supporting evidence for the senate's excuse is telling. 

In its reasoning as presented, the senate seems also unaware of how parliament works. No piece of legislation is enacted merely because one party proposes it. The passage of a law, any law, in fact requires that the proposed legislation win the votes of more than 50% of the people's elected representatives. With only 150 seats in parliament, it is simply ignorant to believe that Move Forward is able to unilaterally push through any of its policies, let alone more controversial ones. 

But then, those who were complicit in 2014 in the overthrow of Thailand's "democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State" (Thai Constitution, 2007 and many others), did not appoint a senate to achieve any goal of reason, of the good public morals of democratic principle, or of any similar thing.

The senate is, however, to be commended for publicly confirming for voters how urgently Thailand's welfare is in need of every one of Move Forward's flagship policies, which proposals for long overdue reform so quickly made that party so stunningly popular with the Thai people, a popularity that has likely increased substantially since it won 38% of the vote on May 14. 

 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 August 16, 2023, under the title "Popularity counts" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2630335/popularity-counts

Faulty logic

re: "Pheu Thai is taking 'no sides'"(BP, August 10) and "Pheu Thai move splits UDD groups" (BP, August 10)

Dear editor,

The shiny new coalition that Pheu Thai is forming with Bhumjai Thai and others inevitably raises questions. First, who will backstab whom first? Will Pheu Thai do its new best mates forever, or will one of them decide it can cut a better deal? Naturally, this will all be for the stability of the nation to better respect the will of the voters, who mistakenly thought that they wanted an end to such traditional ways. 

It is not, after all, as if anyone in the latest freshly cemented new coalition is Move Forward, who have since May 14 continued, as expected, to prove themselves principled, honourable, trustworthy and possessed of backbone.  

The second question, perhaps the more amazing in Pheu Thai's opaque logic, concerns the claim by deputy Pheu Thai leader Phumtham Wechayachai that "There's only one issue, the lese majeste law, that will be left untouched." The problem is that this is perhaps already contradicted by his excuse for the new coalition that "The best way is to set up a government to tackle the problems and materialize the people's will." The percentages, both known and unknown, must, however, bear bear on claims regarding "the people's will." 

Back on May 14, it is plausible that only 38% (not quite a majority) of Thais might have wanted  the lese majeste law reformed in accord with the modest proposals of Move Forward to protect the institution from the persistent abuse enabled by that law in its current form. In the shenanigans since then, the truly obstructionist nature of section 112 of the Criminal Code has been publicly exposed by the senate and other bodies, who put it front and centre under a spot light as their excuse for rejecting "the people's will." 

The planned protests by United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) group in the north, once upon a time a Shinawatra stronghold, "in a symbolic move against Pheu Thai's political U-turn," give weight to the suspicion that that initial 38% who had favoured Move Forward and its flagship policies might well have grown today to well over 50%. The fact is that unless I've missed a pertinent poll or two done over recent weeks, no one knows, or could know, otherwise.  

 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 August 14, 2023, under the title "Faulty logic" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2628906/leaping-ahead

The bigger picture on speech

re: "Limits on speech" (BP, PostBag, August 11, 2023) 

Dear editor,

Eric Bahrt raises an interesting perspective on whether the law of a democratic nation may justly implement "a ban on public Koran burning." His argument does not hold up. The comparison with American Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes's famous dictum that "You can't stand up in a movie theatre and shout 'fire' unless there really is one" is not a valid comparison. Justice Holmes was concerned not with bullying threats of violence from easily offended snowflakes, but with the mayhem that can naturally ensue when people panic.

What Mr Bahrt's argument boils down to is that a threat of violence from some group of zealots inspired by religion, nation, or whatever faith-driven fantasy, is a sufficient reason to deny the right to peaceful free speech. That is not the "slippery slope" Mr Bahrt mentions. It is an open door to banning all speech that offends.

The proper response to faith-driven intimidation is to ensure that those threatened are protected; that is the duty of the state. It is what just governance provides its citizens. Sweden and Denmark would be in the wrong to criminalize the burning of the Koran merely because doing so is deeply offensive to a set of beliefs about sincerely imaged things taken far too seriously by fragile, immature bullies who desperately fear different opinions and critical reasoning.  

 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 August 13, 2023, under the title "The bigger picture on speech" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2628433/learning-that-counts

Poll paralysis

re: "Pheu Thai, Bhumjaithai announce bid to form govt" (BP, August 7, 2023) & "Manchester United, Buriram top football teams for Thais: poll" (August 6)

Dear editor,

It is true as Pheu Thai leader Dr Cholnan Srikaew says of the shiny new coalition forged with his party's newest best mate forever that "the 212 votes [in parliament that] Pheu Thai and Bhumjaithai control were also legitimate people's votes." This remains so even when compared to the far more stunning endorsement of 151 seats given by the nation to Move Forward with its flagship policies for reform. Pheu Thai and Bhumjaithai overlook, however, the more pertinent truth now likely. Namely, it might not be true that those who voted for Pheu Thai continue to be happy with the way that they cast their votes last May 14; many might now be wishing that they had instead voted for Move Forward. It would be useful to have some information on one way or the other on what voters think today. 

After the political shenanigans of the last month, it is astounding that NIDA would waste resources to discover which football teams are currently favoured, to which enlightenment we were regaled in last Sunday's Post ("Manchester United, Buriram top football teams for Thais: poll", August 6). Inexplicably, neither Nida nor similar bodies have polled the obviously relevant questions: Are you happy with how the party you voted for has behaved since May 14? Do you still support the same party? If there were a new election tomorrow, for which party would you now vote?

My prediction is that Move Forward has already gained considerably more support than it had already had on May 14. It has stuck with its principled policies that are right for the Thai nation if traditional ways that have for many decades stunted development are to be reformed as needed. It has behaved with honour and transparency. It has listened to them and given its coalition partners a respectful fair go at every step. It has not rolled over to be violated on command as though no principle or policy could be worth the backbone of standing firm on behalf of those who voted for the party and Move Forward's popular raft of policies.  

I would also predict that Pheu Thai's support has suffered a dramatic decline this past fortnight.

Also worth polling would be how the Thai people currently feel about the actions of the unelected senate, which, by making their lame, deceitful excuse the desperate need to protect it from the Thai people's aspirations, would seem to have put a traditionally revered institution in direct conflict with the will of the people. 

These are the polls that matter last month, this month, and likely next month. 

 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 August 12, 2023, under the title "Poll paralysis" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2628087/no-blessings

Free speech in full

re: "Denmark on heightened alert after Koran burnings" (BP, August 4, 2023) 

Dear editor,

Some pieces of inked paper bound together in a book called the Koran have been peacefully burned in Sweden and Denmark under the protection of the laws of those countries. That book is a potent symbol to some, so the deliberate desecration is understandably upsetting, but like those who suffer with mature restraint the burning of their national flag, the $100 bill, the Bible, a revered poster of Barbie or any other cultural emblem, the followers of the Koran now have a chance to prove the true worth of the faith that each paper copy of the Koran symbolizes. By responding to the rude outrage with peaceful, reasoned rebuttal rather than bullying violence or threats thereof, they will show that their religion upholds good morals. They can demonstrate that, being firmly based on reason and objective reality, it need not lash out in desperate fear at those who question its verities.  

Denmark and Sweden have responded correctly to the extremely offensive but nonetheless peaceful expression of opinion that is the burning of the Koran. If we fail to insist that the law not only allow expressions of speech that we find utterly repellent but actually protect the peaceful exercise of such deeply offensive acts, then we do not in fact respect the fundamental right of free speech, which does not magically stop at my or your most revered or sacred things. Free speech really does mean that others have the right to peacefully express ideas that we, and perhaps a large majority of our society, find offensive in the extreme. Anything less debases claims of free speech to a worthless platitude allowing only already accepted ideas. Islam should take this opportunity to show a moral maturity that accepts that others will think differently about what it deems of supreme importance. 

 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 August 9, 2023, under the title "Free speech in full" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2626029/tip-for-mfp

Military meddling

re: "Prayut vows army will continue to ‘protect the country’" (BP, August 5, 2023) 

Dear editor,

What does Prime Minister (caretaker) General Prayut Chan-o-cha mean by his extraordinary claim that "The armed forces will continue to lead in 'protecting the country'"? Is the Royal Thai Army (RTA) Prime Minister  unaware of Thai history? Does he not understand the dire consequences of his own acts on May 22, 2014, the consequences of which even today the Thai people are unable to escape because of the corruption of law to thwart justice in order to deny the Thai nation the democracy, reform and progress it deserves and plainly desires, as shown last May 14?

How exactly does the caretaker  PM think that repeatedly committing coups against it could possibly constitute "protecting the country”, let alone "tak[ing] the lead" in doing so? Had democracy been permitted to develop and solve the endemic corruption and other abuses that have for many, many decades thrived under the traditional ways of conspicuously wealthy conservatives, Thailand would today be far more advanced politically, socially and morally than it in fact is. Had at least a few of those coups not been committed, had the nation of the Thai people been allowed to develop as did other nations following the end of military interference in their civil matters, Thailand could now be the equal in economic success and international stature of Taiwan and South Korea.  It conspicuously is not. 

 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 August 8, 2023, under the title "Military meddling" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2625385/top-brass-choices

No man is only an island

re: "Religion and politics" (BP, PostBag, August 4, 2023)

Dear editor,

Jeff Wilcox presents as being as well informed on Buddhism as he is on Thai political history. Both are solidly on a par with his understanding of human society. In describing Buddhism's founder, he writes that "Siddharta established the sovereignty of the individual human mind: that people are individuals, not one of a collective species." I am not sure that Siddhartha would have claimed to have established any such broad understanding of human reality, nor would he have dogmatically asserted he had infallibly gotten that or any other factual matter right for all time. He presents as a more modestly human individual.

We are indeed all individuals, although under Thai law, the sovereignty of each is restricted, even to criminalizing the peaceful expression of ideas that displease powerful political players. Whatever else they might be, such political players are thereby proved decidedly not apolitical; to support Mr Wilcox's claim of them being apolitical, considerable public debate would be required. For some reason, that required debate has not occurred.

If Mr Wilcox seriously thinks that we are "not one of a collective species," how does he explain his use of the Internet to interact with the Bangkok Post? Did that just appear out of blue for his "individual human" use? And the Post itself where his letter is published? And if Mr Wilcox buys food, how is that not making him a part of a collective species? Being unique individuals with rights that can be violated does not preclude our also being members of collectives, which are themselves collectivized. 

If might shock Mr Wilcox, but the evidence supports John Donne's pithy "No man is an island entire of itself" (1624). Our species has not become the dominant animal on this planet, now with literal power of life and death over all other living things, because we evolved not to be interdependent members of massively connected and interconnected organizations: collectives we call religions, NetFlix, states, tribes, clubs, corporations, families, projects, political parties, PostBag, and so on. 

 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 August 6, 2023, under the title "No man is only an island" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2624287/revolving-door-politics

Political shenanigans

re: "Policy issues behind Move Forward's failure to form govt: poll" (BP, July 30, 2023)

Dear editor,

The latest Nida poll (July 30) reports that 42.98% of respondents believe that Move Forward was prevented from forming a popular government with Pita Limjaroenrat as prime minister because the party "refused to drop some of its policies in exchange for more support." That figure is perfectly credible. If the poll was conducted on a randomly chosen sample of it, then that percentage also accurately represents the opinion of the Thai people. Equally credible is that "30.46% did not think the MFP had made any mistakes," and that a further "27.56% said the MFP was defeated in a political game in parliament."

What is not credible, or perhaps all too credible, is that Nida would deem it a "mistake" to stand by decent principles. Did Nida really word their questionnaire that way? What is "mistaken" about having sound, popular policies that won massive voter support and then standing by those flagship policies? Is the correct and commendable course of action supposed to be what the Democrats did in 2019 and before, and what Pheu Thai now appears to be doing; namely, to promptly ditch any and every principle for the sake of winning power? 

The salient truth remains unaltered since May 14: Move Forward had and continues to have the most popular raft of policies of any party that stood in the election. The very popularity of those policies has plainly upset the traditional, conservative elements opposed to the very notion that the Thai people should choose the form of their own government. That is why the senate and other bodies have put themselves and all they stand for in direct conflict with the will of the Thai people, who decisively voted for democracy and against the old ways.

A far more useful poll would have been to ask what the electorate now thinks of each of Move Forward's popular flagship policies. That is something that really is worth knowing to a percentage point. Has support for those policies, and Move Forward's principled stand, so alien to Thai political custom, fallen or perhaps risen yet higher since May 14? 

Thanks to Pita's masterful leading of the conservatives against progress into publicly exposing themselves for what they are, my guess (only a guess until substantiated or rebutted by the necessary polls) is that both Move Forward and every one of its major reform policies are even more popular today than they were two and a half months ago. What is known from the last Nida poll (July 16) is that 63% wanted Pita re-nominated for the position of prime minister to serve the nation, which is suggestive. My guess might, of course, be totally wrong: run the polls and find out. 

 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 August 5, 2023, under the title "Political shenanigans" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2623951/political-shenanigans

Religious meddling

re: "Monk treated too harshly" (BP, Editorial, August 1, 2023) 

Dear editor,

The Post is to be thanked for its timely editorial on the shameful treatment by the political managers of Thai Buddhism of a genuinely Buddhist Thai Buddhist monk, Phra Rajadhamnithet, better known as Phra Phayom, a well-known abbot of the Nonthaburi-based Suan Kaew temple.

If the Buddhist clergy cared for the Post's concluding ideal that "They must make parliamentarians realise their duty and restore morality to the prestigious Buddhist institution," they would be praising more of Move Forward's flagship policies as being those that best comport with the Buddha's wisdom. But morality, or decent personal and public morals, was never the reason the religion of Thai Buddhism was founded to serve a political agenda rooted in something very different to democracy, to justice, to benevolence, to compassion, to righteousness, to understanding, to tolerance and acceptance, to informed opinion of worth, or any other such moral principle.

As a political body itself, it is a bit rich for the National Office of Buddhism to be telling monks of the religion known as Thai Buddhism not to be political. The reality, as demonstrated in such things as a controlling government agency called the National Office of Buddhism (NoB), is that Thai Buddhism is and always has been a useful tool for political players, who did not want a religion of clerics speaking truth to power. Those power-driven actors wanted and want a religion and monks who tell them they can order as many animals killed as they like to sate their taste for yummy animal flesh, and every other desired indulgence of the body and ego. They want a religion that blesses every act by appointment, with never a word of complaint, unless perhaps to chastise upstarts and say it's OK to kill those deemed communists or the like whose radically moral notions threaten the established conservative order.  

Official Thai Buddhism is run by political players, from the day to day management by the NoB to the appointment of senior monks in the hierarchy legally managed by the state. It is set up that way for those purposes. The richly gilded temples, jade statues, and rich living quarters are not gifted to those who say what is displeasing merely because its true, moral, or in accord with the Buddha's wisdom. There is not now and likely never was anything apolitical about this pillar of Thainess, certainly not in its officially sanctioned forms.

What Thai Buddhism needs is more monks like Phra Phayom and less of the legalistic political interference from the National Office of Buddhism and other political bodies of the Thai 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 August 3, 2023, under the title "Religious meddling" at https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/postbag/2622649/on-your-bike