Moral courage is lacking in Thai society
‘In the case of Ah Kong, all sides in Thai society have shown a lack of moral courage to do what is right. They have been concerned with their own status, positions and politics, and have done nothing. Ultimately, an ordinary old man has fallen victim, having to die away from his family’, said Somsak Jeamteerasakul, speaking to the crowd who attended the funeral of Amphon Tangnoppakul at Lad Prao Temple in Bangkok on 25 Aug.
This reminds him of the regicide of King Rama VIII in 1946, where three people were executed despite weak evidence. The case went through three courts and involved about 12-13 judges, but none of the judges, except one in the Appeals Court, had the courage to say that the evidence was weak and the defendants were innocent, he said.
He believes that the judges were well aware that their verdicts were not right, but they had to act in that way because in the system they were supposed to do so: to find culprits.
It took 30-40 years for Pridi Banomyong to finally clear his name in this case, and through all those years, hardly anyone ever came out to say that it was wrong to execute the three victims and to banish Pridi from the country for life. Thailand and Thai society has always been like this, he said.
Likewise, in the case of Amphon, it was very sad that all through the judicial process, moral courage was also found to be lacking in society. The court must have been aware that the repeated denial of bail and the guilty verdict were not right. Academics and members of the elite, like Anan Panyarachun, Bowornsak Uwanno and Khanit Na Nakhon, who have come out to say that the lèse majesté law is problematic, have been silent in this case. Why have they not come out to say that the verdict was wrong? Where is their moral courage, he asked?
He said that at a seminar the previous week, a well-known staunch royalist said that he did not believe that Amphon had sent the SMS messages, but instead believed that this might have been a plot by red shirts to try to destroy the monarchy. He asked the royalist why, if he believed that Amphon was not the culprit, he did not say so to the public when the verdict was delivered.
These people did not dare to speak their mind because they did not want to undermine their politics and play into the hands of their political opponents, Somsak said.
This even applies to the red-shirt United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship. Thida Thawornsate, chairwoman of the UDD, took over two weeks to mention Amphon’s name in her weekly press conference after the verdict, he said.
The Yingluck Shinawatra government also does not have the courage to order the relocation of lèse majesté prisoners to Lak Si prison where political prisoners had been moved, despite the fact that this is in its power and is unlikely to undermine its stability, he said.
This lack of moral courage has deprived Thai society of judgment on what is right and wrong, resulting in the death of an old man without the blessing of his family, he said.
The funeral of Amphon Tangnoppakul on 25 Aug
The cremation on 26 Aug
Rosmalin Tangnoppakul, Amphon's wife
(From left) one of red shirts helping organize the funeral, Naruemon Warunrungroj (accused of firing a military helicopter and jailed for 16 months) handling kitchen work at the funeral, Rosmalin, and Phayao Akkahad (mother of slain nurse Kamonkade)
Amphon's daughters (front row)
Pranee Danwatthananusorn, Surachai's wife
(From left) Nat Sattayapornpisut, Suriyan Kokpuey (having been released a few days before the funeral) and his parents
Warawut Thanangkorn, having been released a few days before the funeral
112 pigeons to be released
Rosmalin and her granddaughters
Amphon's family
On 27 Aug, Amphon’s family performed a Buddhist ritual of pouring his ashes into the Chao Phraya River.
Print version
Send by email
Comments
Thousands mourn 'Uncle SMS'
Thousands mourn 'Uncle SMS' at cremation
"Moral courage is lacking in
"Moral courage is lacking in Thai society"
Indeed, moral courage, like its close relatives principle and ethics are missing from the ground up in Thai education, and the evidence of this serious malaise is all around. Thais are lawless and unprincipled, they care for self-esteem and money only, in that order.
But the powers that be can't afford to change it lest people become more educated and ask why some folk in Thailand are covered in gold and others are covered in shit. Lest people ask why corruption is endemic and is encouraged by [..] which has done very nicely on the proceeds of corruption thank you.
If an elephant is sick, the vets will reach a point where they put it down. Thai society is sick. From the top down, and that means that moral courage is lacking in Thai society.from the bottom up.
Please excuse me now, I got to go put a "I love the king" sticker on my car in English - you never know who might see it and think I'm a simply splendid person and its in English so foreigners will think all Thais feel the same. It's bullshit of course but hey, who's got the moral courage to say so - right?
In South Africa the miners
In South Africa the miners have been betrayed by 'their' NUM unions and 'their' ANC government. Both, in fact work for the big money mining interests in South Africa and against the interests of ordinary, black South Africans.
Not unlike the redshirts' betrayal at the hands of 'their' Phuea Thai government here in Thailand.
The South African miners have seen the light. Out of the deep holes in the ground where they're usually set to work for the British Lonmin Plc., the Canadian Eastplats, and the other foreign-owned mining companies, they are becoming accustomed to sunlight : ตาสวาง.
It's just a matter of time before the redshirts see the light as well. Chalerm says the reds must stay cool. He's advised the Democrats just to drop a dime and give him a ring directly if the Democrats need the redshirts "taken care of". The ANC government shot at least 34 of the miners dead, many in the back ... let's hope the redshirts don't wait for the Phuea Thai literally to shoot them in the back before they build their own alternative.
While Somsak Jeam may have
While Somsak Jeam may have some justification to point the finger of blame at others, the liberal academic community of which he is a prominent member is certainly a part of that failure.
If you look at the Nitirat anti-LM campaign it's main platform was reform of LM, not abolition, it made no calls for the immediate freeing of all LM prisoners and still allowed for a prison sentence for LM to exist.
So, sure, point fingers at the government, the Dems, the UDD, the Red Shirts, the Army and the elites.
But Ah Kong was let down by everyone.
There was never any campaign for his release of the same international significance as there was for Jiew. Most of the academics, liberals - such as Somsak Jeam - still look down their noses at the likes of ordinary "uneducated" citizens like Ah Kong.
When I first met Pa Ou, Ah Kong's wife, last year I was amazed that the anti-LM movement hadn't been able to accommodate her in a prominent role. She is charismatic, smart and articulate as many have now realised.
Instead, the anti-LM movement relied on academics like Somsak rather than ordinary Thais.
That's their failure and they shouldn't avoid taking responsibility for it by only blaming others.
Wow. The righteous one seems
Wow. The righteous one seems to be only Andrew. And, of course, the undefined masses of ordinary Thais. It is starting to sound like no intellectual, academic, or journalist has any right to make any statement, no matter how well-intended, on anything that is considered by Andrew to be in his all-knowing bailiwick. That seems like a lonely (but self-congratulatory) place to locating oneself.
Albert, Please spare me the
Albert,
Please spare me the personal attack and focus on the points I raise.
I find the unending piousness of Thai liberals pretty hard to stomach particular when set against their incredible snobbery towards ordinary Thais - which I've personally witnessed on many occasion. That's before we get onto the likes of Pravit supporting persons making death threats towards my family and not receiving one single word of criticism, something which I find simply astonishing.
I also won't apologise if you find my views and criticisms of the little princes of the Thai liberal scene hard to take. Or are you suggesting they are above criticism?
And, in fact, these "liberals" are, despite having some "status" and "recognition", actually pretty irrelevant to the huge social and political changes that have swept through Thailand in the last few years. Their self-importance should be pricked regularly. And, it is my view, they have as much to lose regarding their diminishing sacrialised "ajarn" status from these changes as other members of the elite.
Only when they can be robustly criticised as part of a public discourse without reverting to abuse, threats, personal attacks, reference to their level of education or their fan-club members chipping in with the same, will I be happy.
;-)
Thanks for making my point
Thanks for making my point Andrew. Only you are entitled to make personal attacks.
However, my words were more than a personal attack. They were a statement about those who claim to be the only ones who understand "the truth," a position you allocate to yourself on these things.
How about pricking your own self-importance some time?
Don't take that as a personal attack. Just some advice to journalists/academics who take themselves to be the only ones with the truth available to them.
Albert I make no claims to
Albert
I make no claims to have access to any kind of truth.
What I do make a claim to is a right to publicly criticise likes of Somsak, Pravit etc.
To use Ah Kong's funeral as opportunity to attack the Red Shirts, whilst the academic allies of Somsak Jeam supported amendments to lese majeste that would have kept Ah Kong in jail, is, in my view, not a particularly "moral" thing to do.
You might not like that view but I am certainly entitled to it and certainly entitled to point it out an obvious hypocrisy.
If your only retort is to not actually answer the point I raise but attack me personally, that's your choice.
Your first sentence makes
Your first sentence makes considerable sense, for in your comments you attack Somsak for supporting Nitiriat and (presumably amending LM) when he has actually agreed with you on the need to go further than Nitirat (http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2012/02/01/international-solidarity-for-the-amendment-of-article-112/). He also called for the 112 law to be revoked (http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/2498).
He has also called for solidarity with LM prisoners (http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/2512). Why you attack him for that is beyond me.
Further on truth, if you read the article above, Somsak does not attack the average red shirt, but the leadership; he seems pretty specific on that.
By all means criticize, but don't make it up.
Albert Please re-read my
Albert
Please re-read my comments - you don't seem to read what I've actually written.
Given that Nitirat and the core of the LM reform movement were happy to keep a prison sentence on the books why didn't Somsak Jeam criticise them?
Why, as it says in the article, only state "This even applies to the red-shirt United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship"? Surely if it's ok for Somsak's liberal academic buddies to compromise why not the UDD as well? Or are the "liberal academics" the only ones capable of making the correct, well-educated, compromise?
There's also been a failure of the academic, liberal community that Somsak is a part of. Not just the UDD leadership.
But, as you're making clear here, while it is ok to attack the UDD leadership and the Red Shirts it is not ok to criticise the "royalty" of the liberal academic community.
What I would say is that everyone failed Ah Kong and his family. Somsak Jeam and writers like myself included.
A couple of my replies have
A couple of my replies have gone to the ether, so I'll summarize here. Andrew, I can read and do read your comments. Perhaps you should re-read the post here, where Somsak states: "In the case of Ah Kong, all sides in Thai society have shown a lack of moral courage to do what is right. They have been concerned with their own status, positions and politics, and have done nothing." Notice the reference to "all sides", which is a point you later make as if it is new. As I have shown, Somsak has opposed LM, including agreeing with you that calls for reform don't go far enough. He also criticized the red shirt leadership, not the rank and file.
It seem very clear that you are creating and fabricating a personal attack on Somsak for no reason.
And, BTW, I am not an enemy. I read your stuff with great interest and enthusiasm. However, these kinds of comments by you test your credibility.
Albert Why is any criticism
Albert
Why is any criticism of likes of Somsak, Pravit or the other "stars" of the liberal progressives always considered as personal attacks?
Why don't you criticise Pravit for promoting a cyber troll who made 100s of vile, misogynistic comments to my wife and death threats to my family?
Why only attack me and my credibility because I dare to critique's Somsak's role as a moral arbiter?
I don't call Somsak names. I don't say "follow this guy on twitter who has made death threats to Somsak's family" and nor would I ever do that.
In fact when death threats were made to Somsak I publicly supported him and wrote several articles to bring attention to his predicament.
So how come the "liberals" can publicly support persons who made death threats to my family but I can't critique them in non-personal terms?
It's almost surreal and quite comic.
Okay, you have made yourself
Okay, you have made yourself clear Andrew. You attack Somsak, essentially making stuff up and attributing postions to him that I have demonsrtated he doesn't have, all because he was quoted in a story by Pravit, and you and Pravit are in dispute.
Albert I'm in dispute with
Albert
I'm in dispute with anyone that thinks it is ok to promote and support internet trolls making death threats towards someone's family member just because they can't handle criticism. Aren't you?
Anyway, Somsak Jeam's latest proposals - to set up a group to monitor the UDD, with academics in the "key positions" - as he has presented them on Facebook, perfectly represents my point that he's elitist, arrogant and also dismissive of more popular and democratic forms of social movement.
But given that nearly all the little princes of the Thai "progressive" and "academic" liberal community are of a similar mindset, he'll be sure to get an uncritical press. And remain, to the vast majority of the "uneducated" (but far more politically switched on) Red Shirts, an irrelevance.
I mean has Thailand seen, for decades, any broad-based social movement calling for democrat change emerge directly from the academics?
I disagree on who is elitist,
I disagree on who is elitist, arrogant and also dismissive.
Albert I should also point
Albert
I should also point out that on the many occasions I visited the LM prisoners I didnt see one liberal academic or journalist there.
What I did see were a lot of ordinary Red Shirts, who went there day after day after day.
For this article to attack the Red Shirts for their lack of "moral courage" is pretty nasty, malicious stuff.
But of course Somsak had his moment on stage at the funeral. His moment in the spotlight. He got to make his speech. Well done Somsak.
The Red Shirts who were at the prison every day didn;t get that honour. They just get attacked by a member of the elite. Again.
Weird.
Guess what Andrew, you are
Guess what Andrew, you are not the only one to have visited the people in jail. In fact, I was there (Remand prison) twice in 2011, with two Thai journalists and 3 academics. Maybe they weren't bleeding-heart liberals.
Do stop being so pompous.
Albert My "role" is very very
Albert
My "role" is very very small if worth mentioning at all and I have never claimed it is otherwise. I certainly wouldn't take to the stage at Ah Kong's funeral and start lecturing others.
The point I raised is that this article attacks the Red Shirts whilst not acknowledging the massive role they have played in supporting lese majeste prisoners. I just gave some of my own personal experience on the matter. I did see ordinary Red Shirts at the prison, day after day, but I didn't see Somsak Jeam or Pravit R.
I think, once again, that's a very pertinent point to raise and would rather you address that than attack me.
As for personal attacks - I am hoping you will condemn Pravit for supporting internet trolls that sent death threats to my family.
One of the really
One of the really disappointing things about people, is their apparent need to impose their own viewpoint, interpretation or mode of thinking on other people. Its an evolutionary throwback, a part of the survival of the fittest thing.
But we ought to be beyond that in the 21st Century. Thais aren't, and many other countries aren't. In Thailand we have the awful pooyay, the K, the Q and of course the faggot Prem. The K-in-waiting is a particularly keen exponent of the 'you have to think as I tell you' brigade, which is going to land him in real difficulty, but no matter, som nam na. Probably the worst offender country these days in this regard is the USA, though Britain, Portugal and Spain have been worthy pretenders to that throne in the past.China and Iran would love a chance at the title as well. Give people a chance to revert back to their evolutionar roots and like as not they'll take it, its an instinct. Like dogs sniffing each others backsides, we just can't seem to help ourselves.
But here guys, you have your opinions, you both need to accept and understand that you will each not impose your opinions on the other, nor does it seem you are likely to persuade the other to your view.
Probably Pravit is an asshole. Probably Somsak is an asshole, the guy who threatened Andrew's family is definitely an asshole but they are Thai so they have a natural advantage in the 'I'm an asshole' game. But please guys, give us all a break. We got rid of Cartalucci, and the racist spammer John'Francis (the Francis is so important dontcha know), while not yet gone, has definitely been handed his hat.
Why not just accept that you don;t share each others opinions, nor will you persuade the other to do so, - move on. That way we can all enjoy the fruits of intelligent conversation in a country which is not known for its intelligent conversation.
Andrew, I'm not suggesting
Andrew,
I'm not suggesting that Albert falls into this category, but i have long been fascinated by the number of foreigners (often those from Pattaya). who are ready to stand in line to defend King, country and the obnoxious yellow shirts in Thailand, as well as parroting anti-redshirt abuse.
At first I did what most rational people do, that is to write them off as being slightly ridiculous and probably poorly educated barfies, refugees from the BNP in England, or in thrall to their bar-girl wives and girlfriends, but I'm not sure this really explains the phenomenon. Perhaps its that they are just as (or even more) vulnerable to the pernicious royalist propaganda as Thais, I don't know, certainly the stance I see many foreigners who ought to know better adopting on the pages of that dreadful ThaiVisa site often seems barely rational and nearly always spectacularly uninformed. Ditto their apparent hatred of all things Thaksin (yes, yes, I know you don't go to ThaiVisa if you're looking for intelligent opinion, but sometimes its tempting to pop in and see what the beer and pussy brigade are saying this week).
What do you think makes these people support what I consider to be a fascist fascist regime supported by indoctrinated drones and cynically manipulative people with a vested interest?
Its a genuine question, perhaps a little bit off-topic, but relevant none-the-less - I'm interested in the psychology but so far, all forays into their pits to try and guage the thinking process has been a tad depressing..
I always thought the wrong
I always thought the wrong anti 112 tack was taken with Ah Kong's case - for me it didn't really matter much whether he sent the messages or not (although the possibility that he didn't, means his jailing & subsequent death must be on the conscience on those who jailed him, and whoever actually sent the messages).
I've since seen the content of the messages (which were sent at a time when pro democracy demonstrators were be killed by the military/royalist establishment) and still have the same view:- that the punishment far outweighed any possible crime.
R.I.P. Ah Kong - from what I can see, all who knew you, loved you.
The willingness ... and the
The willingness ... and the ability ... to throw all semblance of legal process to the wind in order to terrorize the Thai public remains the most salient feature of Amphol's persecution.
Unfortunately, lots of people are persecuted for lese majeste. The Royalist Regime routinely turns a deaf ear to all manner of protests, lets its wheels of law grind on, crushing any and all Thais it drops between them.
But Amphol's case was one in which the Royalists did throw all caution to the winds, wildly overstepping the bounds of the law with their pell-mell lese majeste inquisition, and it seemed sure they finally would be beaten in the courts and Amphol freed.
No one expected the Royal Thai Courts to tear up the law books. Only The Royal Thai Army had done that in the past. No one expected the judges to convict Amphol of the non-crime of being unable to disprove the charges laid up against him.
When the Courts tear up the law books, when the judges play the part historically reserved to the treasonous mutineers of the Royal Thai Army ... well, then there truly is no hope under such a regime.
Amphol was the first victim of the new, lawless Royalist Regime. Amphol should not have spent a day in prison on the basis of the case against him, 112 exceptionalism or no, and he would not have if the Thai courts had obeyed Thai laws.
I imagine you are savoring the pure evil of the 112 law and are jealous that its been displaced at the top of the stack of 'evil things' by concern for the rule of law itself.
I am afraid that the Royalist Regime's having officially cashiered the rule of law puts us all in worse straits than any one or all of the draconian laws in place in Thailand, and puts the reinstatement of the Rule of Law itself, a much tougher task than the repeal of any one bad law, onto the top of the stack in Thailand.
Since when has rule of law
Since when has rule of law ever been a consideration in Thailand, generally - let alone regarding LM or anything else to do with the monarchy?
JFL While the brutality of
JFL
While the brutality of Amphon's case should never be forgotten or in anyway diminished, it is my view that Da Torpedo's case was the source from which everything else flowed.
The treatment of this woman has been beyond disgusting and the failure of Amnesty or any of the other human rights organisations to intervene in her case directly led to the creation of the context within which Amphon's terrible story became possible.
Well you're both 'right' ...
Well you're both 'right' ... or I agree with you both. But in the case of the Rule of Law the Royalist Regime always maintained that it still obtained ... we, and the world, just didn't ... couldn't ... understand the mystical, crystalline beauty of it all.
Darunee's was the first overt political persecution 'defending the King' ... but remember their having 'undone' her original 'conviction' so the magical, mystical priests of the hocus-pocus could redo it following proper ritual means? Their feet were a full meter off the ground the whole time ... Darunee would have had to have read in the newspapers that her 'case' had in anyway 'changed'. But of course you cannot read newspapers in the Hell Holes of Bangkok. And no one believes anything printed in them anyway.
Look where the abrogation of the Rule of Law has taken them ... calling the elected government before them to explain its actions. The new constitution ... the only means of righting the capsized ship of state ... pushed onto the back burner. And the 'peoples' government complicit, and in full retreat.
Thanks for your piece on Payao at your 'new home' Andrew. In my case, at least, you provide a very much appreciated contact with the Regime's victims. I find it heartening indeed to hear and to see their resolute insistence that justice be done ... for 'Kate' who can no longer insist on justice for herself, in Payao's case ... whatever it takes.
And while all of this is
And while all of this is interesting ... Darunee, Surachai, Somyot and all the others are still in prison, all day everyday.
Somyot's scheduled for another 'session' in less than 2 weeks, on the 19th. There is speculation that the thumbscrews will be re-tightened and that he'll be sent back to the Regime's standard, indefinite pre-trial confinement ... and the 112 Family Network is appealing for letters to the court and to Yingluck seeking at least his bail, in lieu of summary dismissal of the bogus case against him.
I'm happy to write a letter to Pairoj and one to Yingluck ... and they're happy to file it under 't' for trash, I'm sure. I hope that more farangs then just myself donate a sheet of paper to the Regime's trash bins in Somyot's and the others' cause. Perhaps they'll at least keep count.
My question : where is the UDD?
If a few tens of thousands of redshirts wrote letters to Yingluck, reminding her of who put her in power, such as it is, and that they expect her to work for them or she can expect to be out of power ... then, perhaps, there would be a response.
In fact one way or the other there would be a response : "Yes I'll help" or "Drop dead".
So far it's seemed to be the latter. A direct question would elicit an unequivocal answer and allow the redshirts to make appropriate plans to continue the struggle.
Electing their own leadership ought to top out their agenda regardless. Democracy begins at home. Organizing, nominating, and electing their own leadership will not only provide good practice, it will provide a responsive, democratic organization of their own ... and bottom-up leadership to stand on their own in the next election.
JFL Thanks for your comment
JFL
Thanks for your comment on my Payao article - she's a fighter, that's for sure.
I will also continue to do what I can to provide a space for voices like hers.
Given that almost none of the international ever talk to such people I continue to pretty much have a monopoly in the English language.
The willingness ... and the
The willingness ... and the ability ... to throw all semblance of legal process to the wind in order to terrorize the Thai public remains the most salient feature of Amphol's persecution.
Unfortunately, lots of people are persecuted for lese majeste. The Royalist Regime routinely turns a deaf ear to all manner of protests, lets its wheels of law grind on, crushing any and all Thais it drops between them.
But Amphol's case was one in which the Royalists did throw all caution to the winds, wildly overstepping the bounds of the law with their pell-mell lese majeste inquisition, and it seemed sure they finally would be beaten in the courts and Amphol freed.
No one expected the Royal Thai Courts to tear up the law books. Only The Royal Thai Army had done that in the past. No one expected the judges to convict Amphol of the non-crime of being unable to disprove the charges laid up against him.
When the Courts tear up the law books, when the judges play the part historically reserved to the treasonous mutineers of the Royal Thai Army ... well, then there truly is no hope under such a regime.
Amphol was the first victim of the new, lawless Royalist Regime. Amphol should not have spent a day in prison on the basis of the case against him, 112 exceptionalism or no, and he would not have if the Thai courts had obeyed Thai laws.
I imagine you are savoring the pure evil of the 112 law and are jealous that its been displaced at the top of the stack of 'evil things' by concern for the rule of law itself.
I am afraid that the Royalist Regime's having officially cashiered the rule of law puts us all in worse straits than any one or all of the draconian laws in place in Thailand, and puts the reinstatement of the Rule of Law itself, a much tougher task than the repeal of any one bad law, onto the top of the stack in Thailand.