Thailand’s ‘parental care’ is suffocating citizens
It is ironic that the “experts” and bureaucrats on the Board of Censors can decide that a film cannot be watched by the general public because it would damage “public order or morals”, yet they don’t seem to get “corrupted” themselves.
Superiority and exceptionalism, it seems, is the nature of “good censorship”, if there is such a thing.
The latest example of such censorship was the banning of the film “Insects in the Backyard” directed by Tavarin Sukhapisit. The movie, offered as part of the Indy Spirit Film project at this year’s Bangkok Film Festival, is about Tanya, a transvestite father. Tanya likes dressing and leading the life of a movie star, thereby alienating his two teenage children, who eventually run away.
This synopsis was posted on prachatai.com, which is all we will know about this film because the censors decided last week that the content was unsuitable for people of all ages.
Never mind that the film might carry a message, or can be interpreted according to the viewer’s discretion. To the board, each and every Thai, not just those below 20, is so immature and vulnerable that they will be seriously corrupted if they watched this film.
Censorship, be it political or otherwise, lies in the hands of a few people who claim to know what’s best for the rest of us.
Obviously Thais and foreigners who occasionally stray into Thailand cannot think for themselves or be entrusted with their wellbeing, which is why alcohol can only be bought at specific hours.
The authorities are also trying to ensure that no alcohol is sold near schools and universities, while colleges in England provide subsidised booze at their wine cellars.
Like Singapore, Thailand wants to be a nanny state. Be it intentional or not, many citizens end up becoming “eternal children”, being told what political content they can or cannot read and, if they try to read or watch what they’re not supposed to, they might end up in jail.
Also part and parcel of this censorship mentality is that these children of the state need to be fed “correct” information and values.
Burma, one of the most repressive regimes in the world, survives on propaganda. It has just released Aung San Suu Kyi after 20 years of almost uninterrupted house arrest and has 2,000 political detainees.
New Light of Myanmar, the regime’s English-language mouthpiece, always makes sure people are fed with the “right” kind of views and values. Here are some of the so-called values published on Page 16 of the October 11 issue:
? We oppose unrest and violence;
? Wipe out those inciting unrest and violence;
? We favour peace and stability;
? VOA, BBC, sowing hatred among people;
? Do not be swayed by killers’ broadcasts designed to cause trouble.
All these headlines sound chillingly familiar. The Thai film board, the Internet Censorship Committee along with the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Decree, who jointly suspended many civil rights and censored so much information, should feel right at home in Burma.
When it comes to censorship and propaganda, Thailand has certainly adopted the Burmese way, and like it or not, we will certainly be getting more “parental care”.
Print version
Send by email
Comments
...many citizens end up
...many citizens end up becoming “eternal children”... we will certainly be getting more “parental care”...
That's the real drill.
If the 'authorities' cared about Thai peoples' morals they'd have shutdown the sex-slavers in Bangkok... decades ago. They are the sex-slavers in Bangkok, or their bagmen, their silent partners, their complicit accomplices.
They are hypocrites and poseurs, the phoniest of phonies... and viciously so.
It's about time the people of
It's about time the people of Thailand became rebellious teenagers.
This constant mollycoddling by an elitist state and their hangers on (PAD), should be bannished to a deserted island, with no computers, cinema, press or tv. Absolutely no alcohol or cigarettes. That way they won't be living in a state of apoplexy. As they like violence (non sexual of course) and murders, they should all carry weapons. They can pick anyone and make him leader of the island and call him dictator. Any debate about democracy or reasoned criticism of the dictator would be severely punished.
Everyone would live happily everafter.
The people in their democratic society and the elite in their dictatorship where everything is banned.
You know... that's an
You know... that's an excellent idea!
There really aren't that many of the "elite" and the PAD together... Ko Tarutao would probably be large enough.
Yes! That's a very good plan!
I thought fifteen years for
I thought fifteen years for LM was kind of stiff already until I read this today: From:
Royal Decoration Convicts Given More Jail Terms
The Appeals Court has added over 1,000 more years to the jail term previously given to two convicts in a royal decoration scandal case. The Appeals Court has ruled to increase the punishment for Arun Petcharat from 1,130 years to 2,234 years. The jail sentence of Montri Chamnong has also been upped from 1,170 years to 2,180 years. At the same time, the court has lowered the jail term of Ari Sastrasara from 2,660 years to 1,470 years.
The three were part of the original 16 defendants involved in the case of document forgery to apply for royal decorations, which took place between 1979 and 1985. At the time, they worked with the vice abbot of Wat Thepsirin to give out fake donation receipts which recipients can use to apply for royal decorations.
To date, nine of the suspects have passed away. For the remainder of the suspects, one of them was sentenced to 1,920 years behind bars, while the other three saw their charges dropped.
But Frank, this is a
But Frank, this is a burlesque of justice. They did the crimes 25 to 30 years ago and they and the courts are still diddling with this now... and this just the court of appeals! Now it will go to the Supreme Court, and in 2035 or 2040 they will most likely be cleared. Posthumously.
This is the Thai® Double Standard in full-throated song and soft-shoe. The Bangkok "elite" are all chuckling up their sleeves and loving it, knowing full-well and each reassured that there, thanks to fortune, would go I.
The fire is slowly
The fire is slowly dying,
And, my dear, we're still good-bying,
But as long as you love me so,
Let it Sanoh! let it Sanoh! let it Sanoh!
Sanoh in the clear over Alpine saga
They all wear T-Shirts with TSC-CDFHOPP Thai® Double Standard emblazoned across their chests so that whenever they look at each other they are reminded of the verdict.
I think the censors already
I think the censors already have full control of all Thai TV. 99% of everything shown is to make sure people remain sleepwalkers at all times...
Having said that, in the so-called west we expect our kids to revolt, to go through an iconoclast stage as part of their development. It is a sort of rite of passage. We do of course hope it occurs within reason and is short-lived.
In Thailand there ain't no such animal. Total adhesion to what is, and what what is grew out from, is the one prerequisite for social acceptance.
Thais abhor being ostracized and not any longer being a part of "the group". Certainly there are some advantages to it in the sense of social cohesion. But it also allows the ruthless and evil masters (yes, they are ruthless and evil) a free hand in total population control through dominance of the collective mind and emotion of the people.
Not only in cinema or other visual entertainment but everything else also. Painting. Sculpting. Writing. Photography. Absolutely everything is subordinate to what those in power want "the arts" to serve. The monarchy. Religion. Historical figures from the past and present. And of course, to serve those in power now.
Again, elsewhere art itself can be a political tool to call for social betterment through question-asking. In Thailand al art has been stultified. Artists become programmers who "create" according to a set of pre-described criteria from which they dare not deviate.
To round out the analogy
To round out the analogy :- Thais are put in the role of the 'children' of 'their' paternalist state. Often explicitly. They have no power over any of the things 'that matter' because, they're not up to it. The Paternalistic state has told them so. Often and explicitly. They are acquiescent for the most part.
- Americans, to take one well-known Western instance, are cast in the role of 'rebellious teenagers' by our domineering state. And we remain so through our own lack of initiative. We can borrow the keys to the family car for our 'big date' on election day, but the car belongs to our parent state, with the duopoly acting as the agents of the corporate/plutocracy who keep power over any of the things 'that matter' because 'we the people' might (would definitely!) reorder the status quo if we had the power to choose... the candidates who run on election day, for instance. We are rebellious teenagers, replacing the Democrats who have most recently betrayed us with the Republicans who were our pen-ultimate betrayers, for instance. Our rebellion is ineffectual, often compounding our problems
- Then there are the nascent political adults, who analyze the real dimensions of their situation, lay out a real plan to take control of their government, put one foot in front of the other to organize themselves and to effect their plan, and then restructure their government to ensure that it will remain in their hands after their extraordinary effort to regain it. I cannot point to an existing example of a national community of political adults, but I can see both the Thai people and the American people, for instance, noting the advent of their own majority and undertaking their respective rites of passage. They both have to 'just do it'.
JFL An interesting putting
JFL
An interesting putting together of pieces of the puzzle. I suspect you may have done a bit of cutting and pasting here and there to make the pieces fit into such a limited space.
In agreement with what you say to a large extent (not that that nor confirms nor negates anything) I do not though think the last part is thorough enough, surely due to lack of space.
Personally I do not think people are all that capable of analyzing the "dimensions of their situations". They may in part be able to do so but probably a lot falls back on intuiting there is something wrong. As interested as I have been during my lifetime to understand and to analyze objectively I still feel I am often left groping in the dark.
Also the political movements that could make a difference have been so totally crushed in both countries a unifying factor is lacking. Possibly acting on the level of unions and local groupings is all that can be done for now. SMall steps within the contexts of what is possible at each particular moment in time and place.
Although your own analysis here is optimistic in a sense and in theory hopeful, in reality i think people are doomed to always being hijacked as a movement by those who know how to pull their collective strings.
Those in power are so fully in control and so able and ruthless to do as they please, most movements get buried or, at best maligned and successfully destroyed in the eyes of the people.
The MSM is also playing a huge roll in operation-mind-control by playing along. The MSM are run by other, ruthless and totally corrupt and greedy people who send their kids to the same schools as the bosses of factories, politicians and others with whom they share the same residential housing. They eat at the same restaurants. Belong to the same clubs. Sail the same seas, both figuratively and literally. They play the game because they themselves are on the receiving end of the exploitation of the masses.
Thanks for your interesting take...
Perhaps I should have said
Perhaps I should have said 'incipient' rather than 'nascent'. I do not think that our collective situation requires any rocket science in its analysis, and I do think that the lateness in the day is making a confrontation with reality a sure bet soon. I take back 'nascent', as it does seem to imply a bit of self-determination, in an attempt to satisfy your deterministic bent.
It may be that a clear articulation of a believable plan of action is all that is necessary to crystallize our collective dissatisfaction in its present supersaturated solution. And in that case I believe that all of us with voice should help in that articulation, rather than continually pointing out the 'obvious' : that we are all doomed.