As my life in Thailand accumulates more memories as the distance between the first discomfiting culture shock of arrival and the present moment increases, I feel more confident, adept, and at home in Thai culture. Although one does not truly feel at home and experience recurring bouts of living the sentence of a perpetual outsider, it is the growing familiarity with predictable patterns and responding to those patterns in a predictably acceptable manner that make life in my adopted country a somewhat satisfying experience. This sense of predictability, despite little grasp of meaning, is the key to navigating the lived life in Thailand with relative ease. Part of the experience of exile is the acute sense of displacement that stems from a realization that by living in the interstices of a foreign culture one cannot share or completely understand the underpinning values or logic of the Thai way of life.
Of course one makes mistakes, and during those times of blunder the strangeness of life reappears with a vengeance acutely felt with deep regrets and strident questioning again about why Thailand is Thailand.
In the reporting of the on-going “civil coup” to overthrow the existing government, I felt a palpable sense of déjà vu of my experience in the first unsettling months upon arrival in the early 90s. When reading the English newspaper Bangkok Post, I was completely shocked by the incomprehensibly shallow and sometimes sheer nonsense that pass for news such as a reductionist quotation attributed to politicians, or high ranking civil servants or a description of what transpired. That sense of déjà vu returned when I read newspaper accounts of the PAD led “civil coup” to overthrow the government of Prime Minister Samak.
Here are some reports based on the Bangkok Post, August 30th, 2008 edition (the only hard copy edition that I could obtain from my wife's office) that once again pushed the limits of my credulity on the nature of Thai reality in the unfolding drama between PAD’s stubborn struggle for the moral high ground (in their continuing occupation of the Government House) and the Prime Minister, who is forced to muster all his cunning and experience so as not to lose any of his tenuous credibility in this fight between “good” versus “evil”, depending on where you stand in the political spectrum.
1. Headlines: Violence erupts – wait a minute.... the accompanying photo only shows demonstrators outside the Metropolitan Police Bureau lying prone on the ground as they tried to take cover from tear gas on Friday evening, August 29th. “Police denied firing the tear gas”. Not a single policeman is shown amidst the puff of tear gas smoke beating up the demonstrators.
NOTE: Lying prone on the ground is the worst possible method of protecting oneself against tear gas especially when there is no wind to dissipate the high concentration. The best possible way is to run away as far as possible from the cloud of smoke. According to Wikipedia, CS gas (tear gas) is generally accepted as “non-lethal”. “The chemical reacts with moisture on the skin and in the eyes causing a burning sensation and the immediate forceful and uncontrollable shutting of the eyes. Reported effects can include tears streaming from the eyes, running nose full of mucus, burning in the nose and throat areas, disorientation, dizziness and restricted breathing. In highly concentrated doses it can also induce severe coughing and vomiting. Almost all of the immediate effects wear off in a matter of minutes.”
If we read the Note inside the box “Day of Scuffles” it reads: “A total of 25 PAD supporters and one police officer were injured during clashes at the Makhawan bridge and Government House. About 20 people sustained minor injuries during the scuffle at Metropolitan headquarters ”. (bold font added)
In my opinion, even if the police fired the teargas, they had every right to disperse the big crowd who could have over run the police headquarters - see below 1a.
1a. in the back page 14, inside the box “Day of Scuffles”, we read that at 7PM “About one thousand PAD supporters rally in front of Metropolitan Police headquarters demanding police return their belongings seized during the Makkhawan bridge raids".
Why were PAD demonstrators so insistent about the return of their belongings when they were indeed blocking Makkhawan bridge for more than 90 days? Huh? This is unbelievable in the annals of demonstration behavior! The demonstrators are acting like spoiled children whose main concern is retrieval of their trivial belongings! Have they forgotten all of a sudden their avowed purpose to overthrow the government? Could it be that their seized belongings cost more than the amount claimed by rumors paid to (some) them to join the demonstrations?
2. Still in the back page 14, is a photo that is described as “Golf clubs, Molotov cocktails, pepper spray and slingshots are among items police seized from the anti-government protest site near Makkhawan bridge yesterday (photo taken by Natthiti Ampriwan). The photo shows at least 50 to 60 golf clubs. Considering that golf is a hobby for the upper middle class to the very rich, are we to conclude that PAD demonstrators are avid golfers on the side, and that perhaps the idea for toppling the Samak government was first broached in a round of golf? It would even be more incredulous to imagine that PAD specifically bought second hand golf clubs from KlongThom as defensive weapons. Or perhaps, the riot police planted these golf clubs, as riot police are also fond of playing golf during off demonstration season.
3. Still in the back page 14, the main (largest photo by Apichit Jinakul) shows a group of police, one shown with his right foot stepping on the back of the neck area of an injured demonstrator. None show carrying guns on their holsters. Two other policemen are pointing their batons on the demonstrator who appears to be bloodied. But there is no anger in their faces. Did the demonstrator charge the police? Or did the police beat up the demonstrator unprovoked? We have no way of knowing the context of this dramatic picture that suggests police brutality!
4. "The Civil Court suspended its injunction to evict the PAD from Government House, saying execution of the order might inflict further damage."
Why the wishy washy stance of the Court? In Thailand, the law can apparently be arbitrarily applied. I don’t recall any magnanimous scruples by the authorities during the 1976 Thammasat clash, 1991 put down of demonstrations in Democracy Monument, Tak Bai, and Krue Sue Mosque incidents. If the decision of the court is affected by outside pressure and therefore shifts to wiggle its way out of firm enforcement, then we may as well forget the rule of law in this country.
5. On page 2, “Electric shocks, sparks, drainage lids deter police” is another piece of incomprehensibly illogical reporting.
This refers to the story of PAD’s use of various kinds of weapons to ward off police from entering Government House.
5a. “At Gate 7 of Government House, where hundreds of police were deployed and prepared to break into the compound, PAD guards tied a long wire to the metal gate and charged it with electricity from a portable battery. When police moved closer, they charged the electricity to generate electric sparks at the gate. ‘Police were scared of the sparks and immediately backed off’, a PAD guard said proudly.
This shows that police have not been trained in disarming the simplest improvised weapon. Do they have no basic equipment like gloves, ropes to dismantle the wiring by pulling at the wire? Thai policemen have no basic understanding of principles of electricity? How much training did this contingent of riot control police receive?
5b. “PAD protesters covered a section of Phitsanulok road with tarpaulins and poured liquid detergent on it to make the surface slippery”.
And the police did not use their sense of smell to determine it was detergent? Why did the police not pull the tarpaulin off the road?
5c. “Rumours about a police crackdown on the PAD had spread every day. Other protesters collected old sewage shaft lids left inside government compounds to use as shield against police batons or rubber bullets”.
A sewage shaft lid probably weighs approximately 10 kilograms (22 lbs). With a nifty trick of knots from a relatively big diameter rope, the lid can be transformed into a makeshift shield indeed. But how long can an Asian sized body carry a 22 lbs shield, much less, use it effectively to parry a baton charge without being hindered by its sheer weight?
5d. “Police reported that various kinds of weapons – machetes, bullets, golf clubs, iron bars, and batons – were found at the PAD’s demonstration sites. They could not confirm if the weapons belonged to PAD. Even if they did, the PAD protesters would not be troubled by their loss, as they believe they can always find other ingenuous ways to protect themselves.”
Did these weapons materialize (Star Trek style) in the PAD’s demonstrations sites? If the police planted them surely that would have been quite an effort not only in terms of collecting these weapons, but also carrying them to the sites. I find the logic totally incomprehensible. If the Americans found WMD in Iraq, would they stupidly dither and say there was no proof that the WMD were Saddam’s?
6. Foreign Minister Tej Bunnag’s damage control. On page 12 “the week in Review” Tej Bunnag in explaining to the international community the invasions of the PAD starting on August 22nd till their seizure of the Government House: “What happened definitely affected Thailand’s tourism and economy, but we would like other countries to understand that this situation is part of the progress on democratic growth in Thailand. We will have to wait and see what will happen next”, Mr. Tej said”.
Progress on democratic growth in Thailand? A civil coup is progress??? Immediately below “the week in Review” is a half page block article “In Print” by Kamol Hengkietisak “PAD’s aggressive move condemned” ends his report on PAD’s tactics: by quoting Matichon ‘The PAD’s long demonstration – more than 90 days now – may have weakened its members and made them want to finish the game early. But the uncivilized use of force not only alienates the general public, it makes it hard for the PAD leaders to find a graceful way out.’ What’s more, concluded Matichon, the misstep cheapens the PAD image to that of an ordinary violent mob.
Can the actions of a violent mob be considered 'progress'?
7. Page 3, at the bottom: “Protesters say police attack proves PM can’t be trusted”
“Mr. Anont, who has no right hand…. Asked police not to use force, but was pushed to the ground. When he fell, police trampled on him and hit him in the head with batons, said Mr. Anont, who comes from Yala.”
"Napat Pitiworawong, 42, said she pleaded with police not to dismantle the PAD stage, but was pushed to the ground and beaten. She covered the back of her neck with her hands while police beat her on the back. They did not care that they were hurting women. They also used pepper spray that burned me and me me choke for a long time. Police saw the demonstrators as criminals, but this violent act makes the demonstrators angry and now they hate the police and the government” she said.
If you are supposedly fighting for a cause with ahimsa, then you must be ready to receive the blows from the police batons and the blood flowing from your cracked skulls as your badge of courage and moral superiority. You were already warned that the stage has been blocking the road for 90 days. A people who want to be treated kindly by the police after they have disobeyed the rule of law and flaunt that disobedience for 90 days or more, are not practicing ahimsa but opportunistic provocation, pure and simple.
The kid gloves (super lenient) approach by the government was extended even further on Sept 1, when Pol Col Jongrak Chuthanon, deputy police commissioner-general ordered metropolitan police to carry only shields and refrain from carrying batons or any other arms when dealing with protesters. This act has stretch disbelef beyond all bounds. Yes, this may help reduce tensions, but how can police carry out their role if they have nothing to defend themselves? This is another amazing first in the annals of demonstration history, unarmed police trying to control a potentially serious riot situation.
Be that as it may, an alien reading the news and following the continuing saga here in Thailand will be hard put to comprehend the nature of Thai behavior and the logic of recent events that can be described as an array of incomprehensible displays of stupidity, arrogance, incompetence, obstinacy, heavy manipulation, unbelievable leniency by the authorities, undemocratic and childish behavior of certain groups who claim to represent the majority of Thais, arbitrary application of the rule of law by wishy washy courts and confusing media reporting. Orwell's mouth would have opened in approval by the word construction of the Thai media.
Perhaps, in our own struggle to make sense of this dire situation that will have long lasting effects on the “progress of democracy” in Thailand we should always remind ourselves that behind all this stupendous absurdity is the constant threat of real violence, a blood thirst of unsatisfiable proportions based on simmering resentments, unresolved injustices and fear of an uncertain future as the country’s most important symbols and institutions are found wanting in defining its role in leading a "modern" Thailand into the 21st century. These recent events are not disconnected to the way Thailand has "plugged in" to the glorious promises of wealth and prosperity in the era of globalization. They are in fact a direct result of the contradictions of capitalist growth, traditional authority and growing democratic sentiments. Those who feel threatened by the loss of control, influence, and power are not wont to let go.
The point of no return perhaps has already been crossed. Thailand may have to go through another violent period so that anachronistic structures may be cleansed. Whatever will unfold in the coming days unfortunately may not necessarily be helping the cause of democratic progress in Thailand because of the divisive angry mood, the spatial polarization in loyalties, the muddled issues, and the strong conservative impulse to retain traditional aspects of authority and ways of resolving conflict. May the Buddha quench all the anger in men’s hearts so that everyone can find a way out of this impasse.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Thursday, August 28, 2008
On the Road to Democratic Literacy or Democratic Infantilism?
I have followed closely PAD’s “showdown” demonstrations that started on Tuesday, August 26th with the avowed purpose of bringing down the government of Samak Sundaravej. The PAD cited Article 63 of the Constitution, enshrining the right to peaceful assembly, to justify its action (Nation, August 26th).
The storming of the NBT, “invasion” of the Transport Ministry, Finance Ministry and Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives compounds is indeed as Srithanochai in New Mandala commented a “veritable rebellion (what the constitution calls an attempt to seize power by unconstitutional means) is going on in Bangkok. If it was the military, one would call it [a] coup d’etat…”
What intrigues me is the remarkable restraint shown by the government despite the lawlessness in occupying public installations and even destroying public property in the process (so far: compound fence and an elevator in main building 2 (government house) were damaged. People also intruded in the 44th, 41st, and 26th buildings and toilets were damaged; a “seven-figure sum to repair the 5,000square metre yard and garden”, Nation August 28th a), hooligan behavior towards a female official by PAD guards (Nation, August 28th b).
It appears that many found the behavior of PAD demonstrators over reached the limits of political decency. Polls conducted by Bangkok University on August 27th found that about 71 per cent disagreed with the raid of the NBT station, while 68 per cent found unacceptable the siege at Government House and ministries.(Nation, August 27th a). Tulsathit Taptim of the Nation strongly criticized unbridled “raw impulses” taking over PAD, turning itself into its own worst enemy: “While we can live with traffic nightmares or disruption of school routines, we cannot call seizing a TV station, intimidating news anchors and paralysing public works a non-violent campaign for democracy. Nor was it a show of civil disobedience, because the much-acclaimed political practice isn't supposed to harm or terrorise innocent people doing their jobs.” (Tulsathit, August 27th). A Nation article warned “In the end one must ask whether the group (PAD) is pro-democracy any longer, even if they may have good intentions for society and were pro-democratic at the beginning. The public must not be tempted to support knee jerk attempts to bring about regime change because the only change is from one regime to another, without any democratisation in Thailand” (Nation, August 27th b) (italics by blogger). Business leaders urged restraint on all sides fearing that the PAD demonstrations would lead not only to more violence and bloodshed but also affect investor confidence and drive tourists away (Nation, August 27th c).
There are of course secret machinations going on behind the scenes, a “trump card” (Thanong, August 28th) in the form of Gen. Anupong Pachinda, the Army chief, who became the Army chief in the latest military reshuffle, signed by Prime Minister Samak on Tuesday, Aug 26th perhaps as some kind of reward for staying by the side of Samak (along with First Army chief Lt-Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha on Aug 26, the launching of PAD’s demonstrations at the Supreme Command Centre as a base to deal with the PAD attacks against his administration (Wassana, August 27th):“The prime minister, who is also the defence minister, rewarded them for the protection within hours yesterday by quickly approving the military reshuffle list.” The approval of the military reshuffle list has further strengthened Gen Anupong Paochinda, the Army chief, as the most powerful figure in Thailand. “Whichever side he picks, that party will win in this power play. But at the moment, it’s too hard to read his mind yet.” (Thanong, August 28th).
Prime Minister Samak has been warned not to use "draconian" measures to eject the protesters from the government house compound, the use of force would only provoke more violence and a more serious crisis, leading to military intervention (Nation, August 27th b), that violence will spiral out of hand (Nation, August 27th b).
Some commentators in New Mandala site opined that if the same thing happened in the Canberra government center, the police would have been already called to disperse the crowds. The counter argument put forth was that Thailand’s government is in no position to take the moral high ground. However, is there any objective basis to support the worst case scenario that violence will indeed spiral out of control?
Under the best scenario, where the red shirts are not called by Samak to teach the PAD a lesson (surely with disastrous results for the government) and no provocateurs planted to provoke Thai style berserk rage & violence - what is it that cannot be handled by a professionally trained and well equipped riot control group of law enforcement officers? Or had funds earmarked for training and purchase of non-lethal suppression equipment been diverted elsewhere such that there is scant training for non-lethal crowd control, and the police are as easily volatile as the crowds they are trying to disperse? The line between suppression and oppression is very narrow indeed absent a highly trained and equipped crowd control force of "law enforcement" officers.
Lest I be misunderstood, I am not an advocate of violence – any violence is contemptible. However, a citizenry must learn that part of democratic practice and political maturation consist not only in having rights and privileges but also the exercise of duties and obligations. If there is no respect for the law, society cannot go on. Each duty and obligation carries certain consequences for failing to fulfill or adhere to it. If you wish to overthrow the government you have to do it within the framework of the law, or else, face the consequences. One cannot claim exercising one’s right to “peaceful assembly” if according to Article 28 of the 1997 constitution “as long as they do not breach others rights and liberties or do not violate the Constitution and public morality”. If this provision has been abrogated in the 2006 Constitution, then Thailand will essentially fall into this very kind of mob rule and anarchy that we are now witnessing. Moreover, the option of gingerly treatment of PAD demonstrators that the government of PM Samak has to implement because of imponderable contingencies that could spark more violence will result only in reinforcing the mentality that you must’nt be firm with Thais who have come from a very pampered and relatively secure upbringing. (Note the Police offer of Bus Rides to Protestors (to return home!!), Bangkok Post, August 28, 2008) In this sense, democracy in Thailand will remain a fleeting dream, if it remains an inconsistent exercise where enforcement depends (or varies) on the presence of powerful symbolic accoutrements (who wants to manhandle people wearing yellow shirts?), backstage manipulation and backing by secret powerful persons and class. I seem unable to reconcile the brutal response of the police in the 2004 Tak Bai demonstrators that resulted in 85 deaths from suffocation and beatings. Is there one democratic lesson for young rural Thai Muslims and another for urban based and relatively more privileged demonstrators who have appropriated for themselves the colors and prestige of HM?
References:
Nation (2008), “PAD rally to aim at shutting down the gov't, August 26.
Nation (2008a) PM's Office to sue for damage to Government House, August 27.
Nation (2008b) Female official complains of "hooligan" behaviours” of PAD guards, August 28.
Nation (2008a)PAD's protest activities disapproved by majority, August 27.
Nation (2008b), The politics of morality vs electoral legitimacy, August 27.
Nation (2008c), More violence 'would dent investment', August 27.
Nation (2008d), PAD has gotten too far ahead of itself, August 27.
Thanong Khantong (2008), Army chief holds the trump card, Nation, August 28.
Tulsathit Taptim (2008), PAD must not become its own worst enemy, Nation, August 27.
Wassana Nanuam (2008), PM turns to military top brass for protection, Bangkok Post, August 27.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tak_Bai_Incident
http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala
* the term "democratic literacy" is from Weerasak Krueathep, "Local Government Initiatives in Thailand: Cases and Lessons Learned", Asia Pacific Journal of Public Adminsitration, 26(6), December, pp. 217-239. an internet version is also available.
The storming of the NBT, “invasion” of the Transport Ministry, Finance Ministry and Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives compounds is indeed as Srithanochai in New Mandala commented a “veritable rebellion (what the constitution calls an attempt to seize power by unconstitutional means) is going on in Bangkok. If it was the military, one would call it [a] coup d’etat…”
What intrigues me is the remarkable restraint shown by the government despite the lawlessness in occupying public installations and even destroying public property in the process (so far: compound fence and an elevator in main building 2 (government house) were damaged. People also intruded in the 44th, 41st, and 26th buildings and toilets were damaged; a “seven-figure sum to repair the 5,000square metre yard and garden”, Nation August 28th a), hooligan behavior towards a female official by PAD guards (Nation, August 28th b).
It appears that many found the behavior of PAD demonstrators over reached the limits of political decency. Polls conducted by Bangkok University on August 27th found that about 71 per cent disagreed with the raid of the NBT station, while 68 per cent found unacceptable the siege at Government House and ministries.(Nation, August 27th a). Tulsathit Taptim of the Nation strongly criticized unbridled “raw impulses” taking over PAD, turning itself into its own worst enemy: “While we can live with traffic nightmares or disruption of school routines, we cannot call seizing a TV station, intimidating news anchors and paralysing public works a non-violent campaign for democracy. Nor was it a show of civil disobedience, because the much-acclaimed political practice isn't supposed to harm or terrorise innocent people doing their jobs.” (Tulsathit, August 27th). A Nation article warned “In the end one must ask whether the group (PAD) is pro-democracy any longer, even if they may have good intentions for society and were pro-democratic at the beginning. The public must not be tempted to support knee jerk attempts to bring about regime change because the only change is from one regime to another, without any democratisation in Thailand” (Nation, August 27th b) (italics by blogger). Business leaders urged restraint on all sides fearing that the PAD demonstrations would lead not only to more violence and bloodshed but also affect investor confidence and drive tourists away (Nation, August 27th c).
There are of course secret machinations going on behind the scenes, a “trump card” (Thanong, August 28th) in the form of Gen. Anupong Pachinda, the Army chief, who became the Army chief in the latest military reshuffle, signed by Prime Minister Samak on Tuesday, Aug 26th perhaps as some kind of reward for staying by the side of Samak (along with First Army chief Lt-Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha on Aug 26, the launching of PAD’s demonstrations at the Supreme Command Centre as a base to deal with the PAD attacks against his administration (Wassana, August 27th):“The prime minister, who is also the defence minister, rewarded them for the protection within hours yesterday by quickly approving the military reshuffle list.” The approval of the military reshuffle list has further strengthened Gen Anupong Paochinda, the Army chief, as the most powerful figure in Thailand. “Whichever side he picks, that party will win in this power play. But at the moment, it’s too hard to read his mind yet.” (Thanong, August 28th).
Prime Minister Samak has been warned not to use "draconian" measures to eject the protesters from the government house compound, the use of force would only provoke more violence and a more serious crisis, leading to military intervention (Nation, August 27th b), that violence will spiral out of hand (Nation, August 27th b).
Some commentators in New Mandala site opined that if the same thing happened in the Canberra government center, the police would have been already called to disperse the crowds. The counter argument put forth was that Thailand’s government is in no position to take the moral high ground. However, is there any objective basis to support the worst case scenario that violence will indeed spiral out of control?
Under the best scenario, where the red shirts are not called by Samak to teach the PAD a lesson (surely with disastrous results for the government) and no provocateurs planted to provoke Thai style berserk rage & violence - what is it that cannot be handled by a professionally trained and well equipped riot control group of law enforcement officers? Or had funds earmarked for training and purchase of non-lethal suppression equipment been diverted elsewhere such that there is scant training for non-lethal crowd control, and the police are as easily volatile as the crowds they are trying to disperse? The line between suppression and oppression is very narrow indeed absent a highly trained and equipped crowd control force of "law enforcement" officers.
Lest I be misunderstood, I am not an advocate of violence – any violence is contemptible. However, a citizenry must learn that part of democratic practice and political maturation consist not only in having rights and privileges but also the exercise of duties and obligations. If there is no respect for the law, society cannot go on. Each duty and obligation carries certain consequences for failing to fulfill or adhere to it. If you wish to overthrow the government you have to do it within the framework of the law, or else, face the consequences. One cannot claim exercising one’s right to “peaceful assembly” if according to Article 28 of the 1997 constitution “as long as they do not breach others rights and liberties or do not violate the Constitution and public morality”. If this provision has been abrogated in the 2006 Constitution, then Thailand will essentially fall into this very kind of mob rule and anarchy that we are now witnessing. Moreover, the option of gingerly treatment of PAD demonstrators that the government of PM Samak has to implement because of imponderable contingencies that could spark more violence will result only in reinforcing the mentality that you must’nt be firm with Thais who have come from a very pampered and relatively secure upbringing. (Note the Police offer of Bus Rides to Protestors (to return home!!), Bangkok Post, August 28, 2008) In this sense, democracy in Thailand will remain a fleeting dream, if it remains an inconsistent exercise where enforcement depends (or varies) on the presence of powerful symbolic accoutrements (who wants to manhandle people wearing yellow shirts?), backstage manipulation and backing by secret powerful persons and class. I seem unable to reconcile the brutal response of the police in the 2004 Tak Bai demonstrators that resulted in 85 deaths from suffocation and beatings. Is there one democratic lesson for young rural Thai Muslims and another for urban based and relatively more privileged demonstrators who have appropriated for themselves the colors and prestige of HM?
References:
Nation (2008), “PAD rally to aim at shutting down the gov't, August 26.
Nation (2008a) PM's Office to sue for damage to Government House, August 27.
Nation (2008b) Female official complains of "hooligan" behaviours” of PAD guards, August 28.
Nation (2008a)PAD's protest activities disapproved by majority, August 27.
Nation (2008b), The politics of morality vs electoral legitimacy, August 27.
Nation (2008c), More violence 'would dent investment', August 27.
Nation (2008d), PAD has gotten too far ahead of itself, August 27.
Thanong Khantong (2008), Army chief holds the trump card, Nation, August 28.
Tulsathit Taptim (2008), PAD must not become its own worst enemy, Nation, August 27.
Wassana Nanuam (2008), PM turns to military top brass for protection, Bangkok Post, August 27.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tak_Bai_Incident
http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala
* the term "democratic literacy" is from Weerasak Krueathep, "Local Government Initiatives in Thailand: Cases and Lessons Learned", Asia Pacific Journal of Public Adminsitration, 26(6), December, pp. 217-239. an internet version is also available.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Arithmetical Justice, Selective Justice
Last Friday, August 1st, the Bangkok Post boldly headlined “GUILTY” Khunying Potjaman Shinawatra in the share tax evasion case. The criminal court sentenced her to three years in jail in what is called “a precedent-setting ruling in the first of a series of court cases looming over the Shinawatra family” (Bangkok Post, 2008a).
While I have little grasp of the finer legal aspects of this case not being a lawyer, my attention was piqued by the particulars of the case. According to the news: “the court found Khunying Potjaman and Bannapot had deliberately avoided paying 546 million Baht in tax for the transfer of 4.5 million shares in the Shinawatra Computer and Communications, now Shin Corp, worth 738 million baht” (Bangkok Post, 2008a). The verdict of guilty for evading 546 million Baht in taxes resulted in a three year sentence! If justice were purely a matter of arithmetical ratio and proportion, my mind deviously set out to calculate a “what if” scenario – what if by next March 2009 I won’t pay the taxes off my meager salary as an Acharn? I came up with 0.28 days (maximum) in the slammer! That translates to 6.72 hours in the crowded and mosquito infested Thai jail, much less time than checking the tortuously incomprehensible mid-term exams of my students. I consider myself a law abiding person however and regained my senses after briefly indulging in the gleeful fantasy of tax dodging with almost negligible punishment. I will contribute what is due to “Prathet Thai”.
Did the Thai criminal court go easy on Khunying Potjaman knowing that a more serious and just sentence of 10 to 20 years plus hefty fines, (as they do in South Korea) could provoke backlash in the form of a much dreaded worsening of present day instability? Or as my Thai colleague opined the (light) sentence caused the Shinawatra family to lose face (naa tek), suggesting that in the Thai order of things losing face is already enough punishment?
I don’t know. But when I recall the many injustices in the recent and not too recent past, of the countless big fishes that flouted the law with great impunity, I wonder if we will ever have real justice in this world. This is when perpetrators will not only have the certainty of being caught and punished but also punished in direct proportion to the severity of the crime committed.
Those for example who were responsible for “Hok Tulaa” and the “exceptional cruelty” of the massacre in Thammasat where many living witnesses can confirm that more than “one person died”? If caught, what punishment will the court mete out? Or should we not dig up the past and stir things up for the sake of “harmony”? Why not? Isn’t the insistence in outward harmony really just a disguise for oppression?
Have we already forgotten the “buffet cabinet” serving in the late 80s (Murray,1996)? Surely, they stole more than 546 million Baht from the country. And those who fired at the peaceful “mob mu tue” of the Black May incident in 1992? How about those who gained handsomely from insider information when the Thai Baht was devalued as a result of the financial crisis of 1997? And thereafter, the leaders of the post-1997 bust that eagerly sold the country’s (failed) assets at the behest of the IMF and WB to foreigners - precisely one of the rationale for the reactive formation of the “Thai Rak Thai” party? And those responsible for the drug war where an average of 45 people were killed each day for three months just because their names appeared in the black list? The deaths in the Tak Bai protests falsely attributed to the weakened state of the victims due to Ramadan fasting (FACT, 2008)? More recently, last June 18, 2008, the Nation reported that the Assets Examination Committee found corruption that may have cost the state up to Bt110 billion (with a “b” as in boy, unless the Nation was sloppy in its editing) through the privatisation of state enterprises (Nation, 2008). Using Potjaman’s court ruling as reference, 110 billion Baht would amount to approximately 600 years in combined jail sentences. How many of the responsible for this alleged massive corruption will be brought to trial and convicted? And lest we forget, how about every conceivable report of “irregularities” (in the last two decades alone) in the Ministries of Commerce, Transport and Communications, Health, Education, and by the way, the Military (& Air Force & Navy)? The grossly overpriced Suvannabhumi Airport?
If we examine the international arena, the situation is even worse. If for a moment we forget the “excesses” of Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, we discover even more recent instances of grave injustices. The international press reported triumphantly the case of ex-Bosnia leader Karadzic who was finally caught after nearly 13 years on the run and charged for his role on the 44 month siege of Sarajevo that left 10,000 dead and the July 1995 massacre of about 8,000 Muslims in Srebrenica (Bangkok Post, 2008b). Is it also not the time to arrest Kissinger and put him on trial for his crimes against humanity - the carpet bombing of Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam? As Noam Chomsky said “if the Nuremberg laws were applied then every post-war (WWII) American president would’ve been hanged.”
The West has imposed its notions of progress and civilization on the rest of the world. We now know from this brief existence of ours in an increasingly fragile and dangerous world the concept of justice is imperfect and is biased in favor of the wealthy and powerful, especially those whose actions supported and benefitted the imperial capitalist system. If we haven’t yet, we should disabuse ourselves of the notion of Western moral superiority. How much farther in terms of human decency can development and progress in this age of globalization take us on this issue of justice? How is it that we seem to be much farther now from the possibility that a group of persons can “decide once and for all what is to count among them as just and unjust”? (Rawls, 1999:12).
References:
Bangkok Post (2008a), “Guilty”, August 1.
Bangkok Post (2008b), “Karadzic goes before court for first time”, August 1.
Chomsky, Noam interview with BBC's Francine Stock at London's St Paul's Cathedral, Dec 2002. Quote from video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=676452061991429040&q=chomsky&ei=5l6WSJ7VOYq0wgPLman1BA
FACT (2008), "Samak rewrites Tak Bai massacre" published by Bangkok Post, 26 February. http://facthai.wordpress.com/2008/02/26/samak-rewrites-tak-bai-massacre-bangkok-post/
Murray, David (1996), Angels and Devils: Thai Politics from February 1991 to September 1992 - A Struggle for Democracy? Bangkok: White Orchid Press.
Nation (2008), “State Enterprise workers join PAD protest”, June 18.
Rawls, John (1999), A Theory of Justice, Revised Edition, Harvard University Press.
The Trials of Kissinger
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2815881561030958784&q=trial+of+kissinger&ei=aV-WSOGkLYOGwgOg-Pz2BA
While I have little grasp of the finer legal aspects of this case not being a lawyer, my attention was piqued by the particulars of the case. According to the news: “the court found Khunying Potjaman and Bannapot had deliberately avoided paying 546 million Baht in tax for the transfer of 4.5 million shares in the Shinawatra Computer and Communications, now Shin Corp, worth 738 million baht” (Bangkok Post, 2008a). The verdict of guilty for evading 546 million Baht in taxes resulted in a three year sentence! If justice were purely a matter of arithmetical ratio and proportion, my mind deviously set out to calculate a “what if” scenario – what if by next March 2009 I won’t pay the taxes off my meager salary as an Acharn? I came up with 0.28 days (maximum) in the slammer! That translates to 6.72 hours in the crowded and mosquito infested Thai jail, much less time than checking the tortuously incomprehensible mid-term exams of my students. I consider myself a law abiding person however and regained my senses after briefly indulging in the gleeful fantasy of tax dodging with almost negligible punishment. I will contribute what is due to “Prathet Thai”.
Did the Thai criminal court go easy on Khunying Potjaman knowing that a more serious and just sentence of 10 to 20 years plus hefty fines, (as they do in South Korea) could provoke backlash in the form of a much dreaded worsening of present day instability? Or as my Thai colleague opined the (light) sentence caused the Shinawatra family to lose face (naa tek), suggesting that in the Thai order of things losing face is already enough punishment?
I don’t know. But when I recall the many injustices in the recent and not too recent past, of the countless big fishes that flouted the law with great impunity, I wonder if we will ever have real justice in this world. This is when perpetrators will not only have the certainty of being caught and punished but also punished in direct proportion to the severity of the crime committed.
Those for example who were responsible for “Hok Tulaa” and the “exceptional cruelty” of the massacre in Thammasat where many living witnesses can confirm that more than “one person died”? If caught, what punishment will the court mete out? Or should we not dig up the past and stir things up for the sake of “harmony”? Why not? Isn’t the insistence in outward harmony really just a disguise for oppression?
Have we already forgotten the “buffet cabinet” serving in the late 80s (Murray,1996)? Surely, they stole more than 546 million Baht from the country. And those who fired at the peaceful “mob mu tue” of the Black May incident in 1992? How about those who gained handsomely from insider information when the Thai Baht was devalued as a result of the financial crisis of 1997? And thereafter, the leaders of the post-1997 bust that eagerly sold the country’s (failed) assets at the behest of the IMF and WB to foreigners - precisely one of the rationale for the reactive formation of the “Thai Rak Thai” party? And those responsible for the drug war where an average of 45 people were killed each day for three months just because their names appeared in the black list? The deaths in the Tak Bai protests falsely attributed to the weakened state of the victims due to Ramadan fasting (FACT, 2008)? More recently, last June 18, 2008, the Nation reported that the Assets Examination Committee found corruption that may have cost the state up to Bt110 billion (with a “b” as in boy, unless the Nation was sloppy in its editing) through the privatisation of state enterprises (Nation, 2008). Using Potjaman’s court ruling as reference, 110 billion Baht would amount to approximately 600 years in combined jail sentences. How many of the responsible for this alleged massive corruption will be brought to trial and convicted? And lest we forget, how about every conceivable report of “irregularities” (in the last two decades alone) in the Ministries of Commerce, Transport and Communications, Health, Education, and by the way, the Military (& Air Force & Navy)? The grossly overpriced Suvannabhumi Airport?
If we examine the international arena, the situation is even worse. If for a moment we forget the “excesses” of Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, we discover even more recent instances of grave injustices. The international press reported triumphantly the case of ex-Bosnia leader Karadzic who was finally caught after nearly 13 years on the run and charged for his role on the 44 month siege of Sarajevo that left 10,000 dead and the July 1995 massacre of about 8,000 Muslims in Srebrenica (Bangkok Post, 2008b). Is it also not the time to arrest Kissinger and put him on trial for his crimes against humanity - the carpet bombing of Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam? As Noam Chomsky said “if the Nuremberg laws were applied then every post-war (WWII) American president would’ve been hanged.”
The West has imposed its notions of progress and civilization on the rest of the world. We now know from this brief existence of ours in an increasingly fragile and dangerous world the concept of justice is imperfect and is biased in favor of the wealthy and powerful, especially those whose actions supported and benefitted the imperial capitalist system. If we haven’t yet, we should disabuse ourselves of the notion of Western moral superiority. How much farther in terms of human decency can development and progress in this age of globalization take us on this issue of justice? How is it that we seem to be much farther now from the possibility that a group of persons can “decide once and for all what is to count among them as just and unjust”? (Rawls, 1999:12).
References:
Bangkok Post (2008a), “Guilty”, August 1.
Bangkok Post (2008b), “Karadzic goes before court for first time”, August 1.
Chomsky, Noam interview with BBC's Francine Stock at London's St Paul's Cathedral, Dec 2002. Quote from video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=676452061991429040&q=chomsky&ei=5l6WSJ7VOYq0wgPLman1BA
FACT (2008), "Samak rewrites Tak Bai massacre" published by Bangkok Post, 26 February. http://facthai.wordpress.com/2008/02/26/samak-rewrites-tak-bai-massacre-bangkok-post/
Murray, David (1996), Angels and Devils: Thai Politics from February 1991 to September 1992 - A Struggle for Democracy? Bangkok: White Orchid Press.
Nation (2008), “State Enterprise workers join PAD protest”, June 18.
Rawls, John (1999), A Theory of Justice, Revised Edition, Harvard University Press.
The Trials of Kissinger
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2815881561030958784&q=trial+of+kissinger&ei=aV-WSOGkLYOGwgOg-Pz2BA
Sunday, July 13, 2008
The dismal state of Thai education – one Acharn’s point of view.
To those unfamiliar with the Thai education system especially at the university level, the term “Acharn” is the equivalent to “sensei” in Japanese – i.e., a teacher or professor. The difference is that here in Thailand the term carries an honorific connotation especially if one is associated with the more prestigious state universities.
What qualifies me to criticize the state of Thai education? Do I have motives other than to shed light on the problem, or do I have any ulterior motives, perhaps an axe to grind to avenge some injustice that may have been visited on me as a foreign lecturer?
I have been involved in the Thai University education system in one form or another as a ……. for nearly 9 years, in both undergraduate and graduate level in two of the top most state universities of the country. Moreover, I had also been involved in academic administration at the professional training level in an institute that is closely associated with universities locally and abroad.
I can assure you that the purpose for writing this piece is primarily to document and lay bare my thoughts that have grown from my frustration both as a father seeing my Thai daughters’ innate curiosity and sense of wonder progressively and irreversibly ebbing over the years and as a foreign Acharn struggling to earn his keep and finding the purpose of life within the Thai educational system. It is hoped that these thoughts can make a tiny contribution to the debate on how to improve the dire state of Thai education.
Many foreigners who have taught in Thailand have witnessed the weak educational backgrounds of students, their poor English skills and more importantly, their inability to think and think critically. In my view, the inability to think critically and engage in discussion is attributed wrongly to poor English skills. A deficiency in English language skills is used as a convenient excuse for not being able to understand the subject matter at hand. I wish to argue however that the inability to grasp a concept is not dependent solely on language skills if the curious and adept mind had been trained to think in its native language. Absent that, no amount of catching up in Western languages (through expensive tutoring) will have an impact in facilitating the raising of intellectual standards.
I am not a linguist, but I have been assured that trying to understand Buddhist Dhamma as it is written in Thai would require no less a concentrated effort to comprehend at an intellectual level (much easier I suppose than actually practicing its tenets in life) as would trying to make sense of a philosophical treatise by a Western philosopher. From experience, the problem of Thai students going one evolutionary step above the basic literacy tenets of “read and write” to “grow, to develop some intellectual sinew” (Templeton, 2007:283) stems much deeper than having an acceptable or high level of English skills. Even if Thai students chose to use Thai these same students cannot demonstrate that they can clearly formulate their thoughts, much less write intelligibly. This is not a jaundiced observation of a foreigner who may have felt wronged or imagined receiving shabby treatment by Thai superiors (another story) but was in fact told so by an esteemed Thai colleague in a prestigious university. Writing and thinking can be honed independent of the language chosen to express thoughts in the mind.
Another unforgettable experience I’ve encountered in a reputable graduate program was to discover that most Thai graduate students would take an hour to read a single page from an assigned article in an English journal, taking a protracted amount of time referring back and forth to a dictionary as if word for word translation could facilitate comprehension of concepts that they were ill prepared to grasp (even at the basic minimum level) in the first place. The argument that the weakness in thinking skills among Thai students is somehow related to poor English language skills further loses its cogency when I ask students from other nationalities in class. For example, whenever I ask Vietnamese students whose English skills are as rudimentary as their Thai counterparts, they are able to formulate an intelligible answer either with the assistance of their compatriots who fill in the missing English words that they are at a loss or through their persistent attempts to find the English translation of their thoughts created in their native language from the dictionary. It is clear from the “keywords” in the ensuing translation that their thinking went through a “processing phase” rather than merely information recognition that would have at best regurgitated the information back to the lecturer. The latter would have been identifiable with my Thai graduate students who were likely to have perfect recall of the passage (even its text location) but could not explain what it meant. Thai students were more often than not at a loss to interpret the meaning, the interrelationship(s) of the idea(s) with prior concept(s), and/or its significance for the subject matter at hand. In plain terms, Thai students seem to be unable to make the rich mental connections that would “connect the dots” into some recognizable pattern. Of course this does not prove that Vietnamese students are brighter than Thai students. We would have to control the selection (& admissions) process for that in order to say something more definitive than this reporting. And we would also have to consider the rare exception among Thai graduate students who show motivation and originality, which does indeed occur though rarely.
It is even more frustrating when I teach undergraduate students who are less mature than those in graduate school. Few show interest while others sit impassively or doze off in class where the lessons require conceptual understanding, analytical thinking and synthesis. It is therefore the kind of class that is the complete opposite of what they have been traditionally exposed to, namely rote learning* that produces a state of mind that is more accustomed to superficiality (mai tong kit lerk, mai tong lai la eyat) that is then expressed in a demeanor that is the closest incarnation of Kundera’s “unbearable lightness of being”. I honestly suspect that this quintessential Thainess remains as one of the most incomprehensibly disarming traits that intrigue the jaded and cynical farangs who first arrive on this land of smiles. I require the students to bring a dictionary so that we can consult it together for new words that come up during discussion. When a new English word comes up however, most take a lackadaisical approach to opening the dictionary evoking what appears as total disinterestedness in the task at hand. During discussions, students are visibly distracted by a lethargy that in this type of university would be inconceivable to attribute to malnutrition. On the contrary, I am convinced more than ever that it is strong evidence of malnutrition of the mind.
*Can one ask a critical question in a Law School exam?
That the practice of asking critical questions (in relation to critical thinking) is supremely alien to the experience of Thai students is aptly demonstrated in this vignette. Some law students from Thammasat University complained to the daily newspaper Thai Post that a question that appeared in their final exam on March 11, 2007 made them feel uncomfortable. The seemingly innocuous question that was considered discomfiting asked: "If you are a judge and you were invited by coup makers to work for them for a salary more than you receive now, will you accept the work or not and why?" No doubt the context of such a question was suggestively subversive to those loyal to the military government that deposed the Thai Rak Thai party (TRT) of Mr. Taksin because the question was asked by Pongthep Thepkanjana, a special lecturer in the Law Dept of Thammasat University who no less was also the Deputy TRT Party leader. Were it not for the full backing of the chairman of the Thammasat University Lecturer Council, Kittisak Prokkati on grounds of academic freedom the case would have pushed Thailand to one of its laughable heights of political folly. (Nation, 2007a)
One would surely be guilty of making the foolish conclusion that there is something “inherently” wrong with Thais - that they are unable to carry an intelligent conversation or think in a critical manner. This is pure rubbish. This is clearly disproven by Thai students who are educated abroad as could be typical in the old or new elite families. Indeed, they not only speak English fluently but are equally as able as their western counterparts to hold their own in intellectual discussion, banter and debate. But these are few and far between. It is a rare Thai, student or otherwise who can rise above inane pop culture, their narrow inwardly focused “Thainess”, keep up to date with developments in neighboring countries, and particularly with gray area issues that cannot be approached with absolutist style of thinking (e.g., secret CIA prisons in Thailand, global terror, global warming, peak oil, Iran’s nuclear program, etc.). In short, finding a Thai student with a “going global” mindset is difficult indeed. Again, I wish to make myself crystal clear that this is by no means a derogatory remark on Thais nor is this to suggest inherent inferiority. Similar if not worse cases of ignorance and in the extreme, xenophobia, can be found in other countries, such as America where the minds of many students and the “average” person have been addled and brainwashed by simplistic truisms published by the popular press.
Since the vagaries of keeping body and soul together have led me to a job saddled with the formidable task of forming the minds of future leaders in Thai society the challenge is therefore how to educate Thai students to the level of excellence required for survivability in this intensely competitive global world of the future that is here upon us now. An even greater and seemingly impossible goal is how to stimulate in these young minds a love, passion and an excitement for knowledge; knowledge for knowledge’s sake. The smug belief in Thai exceptionalism and “self-sufficiency” is no longer tenable. Many Thais (rural and urban alike) have already tasted the Promethean fire of capitalist development. It seems increasingly unlikely that a country that has had a long streak of good luck over the last half a century in terms of material development may continue to be providentially endowed with good fortune by beneficent “spirits”. As recent events have shown the underpinning political and social values are far from fully formed or adequate to carry Thailand forward towards a society of self-regulating and self-acting individuals living in a true democracy. The foundations of “democratic literacy” can only be built on solid ground by an enlightened education system that will produce independent thinking and politically mature Thai citizens. As Suthichai Yoon argued (2001), “a civil society can only come about if we get our education policy right.” The way forward can be found through citizenry engaging in debate and discussion without recourse to mindless exhortation to “unity” from above, mob rule or senseless violence as a way out when words and thinking fail to illuminate the path.
Education reform is perhaps one issue that Thai parents agree on and are concerned with. Thai families with the wherewithal have deliberately chosen not to send their kids to the moribund Thai education system. Instead they opt to make invaluable contributions to the educational coffers to the growing number of expensive local private schools and those in Australia, New Zealand and the UK.
We also hear clear expression of concerns from Thai leaders and bureaucrats. For example, on the occasion of the 22nd anniversary celebration of the Ministry for University Affairs’ foundation, Mr. Anand Panyarachun, a former Prime Minister, addressed a large gathering of academics on the question of quality of higher education. Some of the key points raised (Komolmas, 1999):
• low academic standards. lower than those of Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan
• graduates have poor command of the English language
• lack of right understanding of basic concept of democracy among the faculty, staff and students
• faculty members being narrow-minded cannot cooperate together
• though the university is a community of scholars but the faculty have slavish mentality
Nine years later, in March 2008, among the items in the “worrying report” by Ampon Kittiampon, permanent secretary of the National Economic and Social Development Board on the state of Thai society during the fourth quarter of 2007 (October to December) is the quality of education* that continues to fall in the key areas of reading, mathematics and science (Daily Xpress, 2008).
*Low quality education = Low quality politicians
Suthichai Yoon (2001) wrote in an editorial piece the following:
"In 2001, in the heady days of the first term of Prime Minister Taksin, there was much hope in the earnest new education minister, Kasem Wattanachai who declared on his first day of work that that the quota of "privileged" students being allowed to enter primary and secondary schools must be curbed.
We now are saddled with an education system that ignores the vital values of transparency and honesty - that teaches students that creative thinking and imaginative exchanges of ideas are equivalent to risk-taking which should be avoided at all costs. Is there any doubt, then, that the quality of our national politics remains so deplorable? Did it surprise anybody when Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra complained the other day that he had difficulty locating good, qualified candidates for the Cabinet "because we don't have enough of a supply of good and wise people to pick from"? "
In a seminar on education reform sponsored by the Ministry of Education in Pattaya in 2006, caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisang addressing teachers and students from 2,000 schools criticized rote learning and defended the use of open-ended questions (Nation, 2006a). Teachers were told that they should let students explain their selection of reading material and report what it is about, so as to improve their skill in catching the gist of the contents. Reading comprehension was said to be lacking among university students due to limited practice at lower educational levels (Nation, 2006a).
From whence does this state of affairs come from? There are deep historical reasons for the dire state of Thai education that have congealed and solidified into intractable institutional structures that would require strong political will to overturn. Let us not forget that Thailand did not experience the psychic dislocations and humiliations of having been colonized by Western powers. By maintaining its independence the elites and rulers were able to fashion the historical trajectory and development policies of their country with much greater independence than nationalist leaders of newly independent states who carried a heavy psychological, political, institutional and economic baggage from the colonial into the post colonial era. Not having to go through a nationalist anti-colonial movement, there is no equivalent of the momentous breaking-of- chains revolutionary event in Thai mentality. It should come as no earthshaking surprise that one of the accumulated tendencies arising from the continuity in Thailand’s fortuitous history resulted in conservative education policies that sought to reinforce the triumvirate symbols of Thainess – Nation, Religion and King. This meant the continuing stifling influence of the sakdina (feudal hierarchical social structure) mentality combined with the heavily centralized system of government that ensued from the reforms brought about by Chulalongkorn as the last bulwark against invasion by the British and French colonial powers when he run out of buffer concessions. To this day and perhaps for the generations of Thais that lived through the 20th century, mental capacities as well as initiative in terms of independent thinking, reasoning and volition were stunted. Thais were ruled by a succession of paternalistic rulers with varying degrees of enlightenment and ignorance (monarchs, military dictators) who issued edicts, orders and proclamations. In essence, the elites thought for the people. It was not in the rulers’ interest that their subjects had the capacity to think independently for themselves but to accept the natural order of things as foreordained by (wrongful) dhammic interpretations of merit and karma from previous lives. Anything foreign and alien to elite definition of “Thainess” was shunned and considered irrelevant, even dangerous. Subjects listen, obey and willingly accept their fate. The freedom of slaves in the last part of the 19th century was bestowed through an edict rather than fought for in an heroic act of rebellion.
The vestiges of the long tradition of absolute monarchy refused to vanish completely even after it was ended by an elite led rebellion (rather than a popular one). Authority that emanated from righteous rule morphed into an unprecedented form of control by military dictators using the repressive methods of authoritarian militarism. Field Marshal Plaek Phibun Songkram pretentions included large doses of absolutism behind his modernizing façade (remember his cultural edicts?). When the Prapass/Thanom dictatorship took power and restored the monarchy to support their legitimacy, the young monarch was quick to use the opportunity to restore traditional rituals and ceremonies of old to reestablish the preeminent ideological position of the monarchy in people’s mind. This benign, enlightened but paternalistic monarch cultivated its symbolic image to the hilt by righteous rule and adept use of the media that disseminated widely the propaganda that tireless benevolent rule helped improve the lives of the poor in rural areas. The monarch’s moral stature grew rapidly that he is often called upon to intervene at major historical junctures to restore stability whenever the country is pushed to the brink of chaos and bloodshed. He has earned the moral power and authority to bring together the most warring and blood thirsty leaders to compromise for the good of the country.
The seeds of a fledgling democracy fell however on feudal and authoritarian tainted grounds. The response to the refreshing beginning of freedom in the early 70s was unprecedented violence after the liberating manifestation of cathartic release of people’s pent up grievances proved to be a serious threat not only the status quo but also the imperial power of the US that had encroached into Thailand as part of its foolish and costly belief in the domino theory of communism in Southeast Asia.
With this cursory background, it’s no wonder then that it was not in the general interest of the elites to change the education system in Thailand. It benefitted them to have a politically juvenile population of workers and citizens who would not question the status quo nor demand more than their meager share of the profits of a rising industrial economy. Is it any wonder that in the present time the budgetary structure of the Ministry of Education has a highly lopsided almost 80 percent set aside for administrative costs - 15-17 percent goes to teachers' salaries and the rest to construction and the purchase of hardware. Only 3.5 per cent is devoted to actual educational development (Suthichai Yoon, 2006). Is it any wonder why with great frustration I witnessed my two daughters’ natural curiosity and sense of wonder in nursery school grew progressively dimmed as they progressed through elementary and high school (enrolled in one of the best private religious schools in Bangkok)? When their grades were not improving in math and science I inquired if they ask questions in class when they did not understand. Little did I know then about how the Thai system smothers curiosity when I was told “if I ask, the teacher will get angry with me”. Children thus quickly learn to dissimulate by not listening in rapt attention but by distracted talkativeness or mute silence in class. In the process of appearing to understand their sense of wonder of the universe dies. I think this is the intellectual equivalent of “soul murder” that the psychologist Leo Buscaglia referred to when a child is abused emotionally. And since there is no democratic forum in the school for parents to complain (that will cause the responsible to lose “face”) the only coping mechanism is for children who understand precisely that their teachers did not master the lesson plan themselves to internalize the self same methods of teachers – which is by memorization. Now I understand why educational reformists are calling for a change from “teacher centered” to “student centered” education. In my wildest dreams, I may still be proven correct that we should change the “wai kru” (honoring teachers) to “wai naksuksa” (honoring students) ceremony since they are after all the future leaders of this country. Now, that would be truly radical!
It is also no wonder that most Thai teachers place no value whatsoever on critical thinking and keeping an open mind. As Cleary (2007) put it perhaps not too exaggeratedly: “From the first grade, students are taught to "repeat after me", recite a few sums, and believe every word that comes out of their teachers' mouths in quiet obedience. Should one of them even dare to question a teacher, he will be on the receiving end of a boot out the door.” Ignorance is bliss. In my undergraduate classes for example, I get blank expressions when I ask “why” type of questions to stimulate students to think critically. I got slightly less blank expressions but still silence when once I intentionally challenged my students to think that rather than blaming the Burmese (as Thais are wont to do from reading the account of their history books) to reflect instead on whether the sacking of Ayutthaya by the Burmese could have been the result of poor thinking skills and faulty planning by Thai soldiers at that time? The same as the Thai Lao border skirmish in the 1980s where the much better equipped Thai army could not defeat the ragtag Laotian soldiers. I thought I was stirring a hornet’s nest by raising a rather provocative question but received instead cold indifference. It is the same telltale predictable reaction. How do I encourage a love of reading when in an informal poll of students in class only a handful even read the opinion pieces (e.g. editorials) in Thai language newspapers?
The most frustrating part about having to teach undergraduates or graduate students for that matter is the realization that Acharns are on the receiving end of a deeply flawed antiquated education system that begins from day one in kindergarten school. The prospect of having to take the responsibility to repair the damage wrought on students’ minds is overwhelming and can strain the most dedicated of Acharns who by trial and error (& sleepless nights) attempts all kinds of innovations to present an entertaining “dog and pony show” in class so that students don’t lose interest because the subject matter is beyond them. I have already made the decision that I am not going to be a party to the dumbing down of the lessons but instead try to simplify the explanation in the simplest language possible in English. Immaturity plus incompetence in students maybe a surefire formula to inspire challenge among dedicated Acharns but at the same can be a source of great disappointment if no amount of effort on the Acharn’s part can spark the passion for learning in these implacable students.
It has been reported that the real problem originates in the government high schools where it is impossible for any student to fail any subject. The refusal to apply firm standards by teachers in perhaps a misguided wishy-washy manifestation of the Buddhist “middle path” as in the practice of giving students three or four tries at their exams until teachers get frustrated enough to them an easy project and pass them to go to the next level (Bangkok Post, 2004). It would appear that the problem is particularly acute in public high schools in the provinces. According to a report by the Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA) fifty-five per cent of secondary schools across the country, mostly small-scale government-run institutions, have failed national educational standard requirements. The remaining forty-five percent of the schools are either prestigious or located in Bangkok or other urban areas (Nation, 2005). The same report revealed that most students lacked analytical skills and failed to meet requirements in basic academic proficiency: the average score of six graders in mathematics was 44 per cent, 42 per cent in science, and below 50 per cent in Thai. Ninth graders need extra tutorials because they cannot achieve reading comprehension on their own, and vocational school students have to be given basic training by their employers (Nation, 2005).
Additional relevant observations that I have picked up first hand are the following:
• the proclivity of Thai university administration officials to put more emphasis on showy* physical infrastructure investments (i.e., new buildings) and non-essential technology (like high tech library systems) over investments to build first class libraries (replete with books, data bases, electronic journals) and laboratories. In the contest of appearance versus substance, appearance always wins in Thailand (“phak chee roy na”). There is a suggestion that the predilection for these bulky investments are underpinned by the budget approval procedures of the Budget Bureau, although it is also not unknown to hear whispers of lucrative commissions received under the table for huge construction projects (compared to say buying books). There should then be some kind of university ombudsman in the Ministry of Education who is responsible for investigating complaints of wrongdoing by high level university or institute administrators. Still, I cannot help but imagine what the alternative would be like: ordinary buildings but first class libraries – how much difference that would play in nudging the Thai academic illuminati” to stay abreast and make a substantive (not to say the least, original) contribution to advancing the state of the art in their respective fields of study!!! Thailand’s academic world may have leapfrogged the situation in 1964 when Smythe’s (1964) characterized scholarship in Thailand as “arid, stunted and tradition bound” but there is still a yawning gap in terms of achieving a critical mass of “progressive-minded, scholarly oriented” (p.371) academics holding court in a more intellectually open and questioning academia that would fan further the “intellectual fires” (p. 372) more coincident to the level of Thailand’s wealth and democratic opening 44 years later.
• The emphasis on science (in the name of increasing Thailand’s competitiveness) has become so prominent (I would guess even at high school level) that it has, according to Suwanna Satha-anan, a professor of philosophy, suffocated the humanities to a point that is potentially dangerous, trapping people in linear modes of thinking that she describes as “the one truth” (Nation, 2004). The mechanical mode of thinking cannot be ameliorated if reading skills to deepen substantive knowledge of theories and synthesis of conceptual debates leave a lot to be desired. Hence, the default is to undertake quantitative analysis devoid of theoretical content or relevance. I fondly recall an esteemed colleague (also a foreigner who graduated from a prestigious American Ivy League University) who was consulted by a thesis advisee if there was another statistical model that he could use that could improve the R-square (correlation coefficient) of the logistic regression model he was using for his master’s thesis.
• Inadequate reward or incentive system for Acharns in the university. Research funding has improved with the availability of the Kanchanapisek Research Fund, but unless there is a corresponding critical mass of library materials for scholars to read to keep up to date and advance the state of knowledge, research usually gets bogged down in baseline data collection of the rankest empiricist mode devoid of theoretical significance. I remember for example a huge longitudinal survey conducted by our school in which the design of the survey instrument was settled by a “committee” approach that predictably resulted in a meaningless hodgepodge of unrelated questions that had no theoretical framework. My foreign colleague and I promptly withdrew from membership fearful that whatever good name we had might get soiled from this pointless empirical research. This state of affairs unfortunately reinforces the gross disparity in the international research division of labor – local universities conduct the data collection (& earn money) but the interpretation, synthesis and implications for theory (the intellectual valued added) are conducted by their western counterparts abroad.
• Promotion standards must be intimately linked with research rather than administrative experience in organizing seminars or short course training, or obtaining external funds. Those Acharns who excel in and prefer this type of endeavors must be put in an administrative career track rather than an academic career track for the sake of equity.
• Acharns should be expected to show by example that education is a lifelong learning process. Tales of Acharns never again opening a book once they return to Thailand from their Phd training abroad are unfortunately true as borne out by an incident I witnessed of a Thai colleague (a senior Acharn of director level) reading forlornly one of the “Chicken Soup for the Soul” series while waiting in an Australian airport for a return trip to Bangkok. I consoled myself that at least this Acharn was not reading “Reader’s Digest”. This is again directly related to the weak structure of incentives that promote research excellence and the supporting infrastructure of at the very least, a near world class library so that Acharns can keep up to date with the state of the art in their fields.
• One conundrum that works against teaching in English is Thai national pride and a belief in a self-contained country that is able to function without the use of the English language. It is therefore difficult to convince Thai students of the value of using English by appealing to the abstract reality of globalization and fierce global competition without the full support at the highest levels of the Education Ministry and the leaders of the country. This comes at a time when the Sino-Thai tycoons and captains of industry are no longer in the forefront (or have the interest in) of strengthening and deepening Thai industrialization but instead concentrate on the service sector while surrendering the backbone of Thai industrialization to multinationals (Eckardt, 2008). There appears to be little thought given to the putative value of English in the future careers of students, particularly in the instrumental value of the humanities for the future in terms of employability in the coming new structure of jobs (whose configuration will increasingly be determined by multinational investors) as well as the role of the humanities in helping them achieve personal meaning and satisfaction in their lives and careers. Let it be said however, that we should squarely face the possibility that Thailand will end up being a “failed state” if education reform fails.
*“phak chee roy na” – or the fine Thai art of garnishing.
This practice of prettifying is mysteriously ingrained in the Thai psyche. An editorial published in the Nation, entitled “Education reform is the top priority” published Jan 1, 2002 clearly illustrates the foolishness of what may have been good but misguided intentions:
“Nothing sums it up better than the disclosure in a recent international survey - that we have one of the biggest education budgets, only to use the money like fools, wasting it on fences, signs and flag poles.”
So is there any hope for successful remedial effort to reverse the damage wrought by Thai education at the university level? First and foremost, the structural obstacles have to be addressed first by serious political will to overhaul (not simply reform) the educational system which has been paralyzed not only by backward philosophies and standards but also by a “corruption-prone and inefficient bureaucracy” (Yoon, 2001). All the lofty objectives befitting a modern education system more suited to the new millennium have been enunciated in the objectives of the National Education Act of 1999 that “incorporated all of the hopes for the future” (Nation, 2007b). This act provided a roadmap for drastic education reform (Yoon, 2001):
First, enhance learners' quality of life by enabling them to pursue lifelong learning, and to develop their analytical and critical thinking as well as practical work. (italics added)
Second, improve the structure and method of educational administration along with management of resources to better serve people in local communities.
Third, improve the system for teacher training and improve teaching standards.
Fourth, standardise and improve the quality of education through rigorous evaluation and monitoring.”
What will it take to realize the objectives of the National Education Act of 1999? Note however that the first objective presupposes that there is a welcoming environment in place for “critical thinking”. Can reform objectives solve its contradictory goals* with long established authoritarian and paternalistic patterns in Thai culture? It is to be expected that further industrialization will rend asunder the hold of tradition on the minds of people. However continuous attachment to the present Thai model of taking advantage of globalization by providing services to multinationals may eventually find limits in the ability of Thais to exercise effective control of its development direction (Pasuk and Baker, 2008). Absent the “creative destruction” of further cycles of rapid capitalist development, where will the pressure to “modernize” Thai society come from? There is however a real danger that the push for an enlightened citizenry may prove the undoing of the development model of Thailand which has been based on a docile cheap and not-so-cheap anymore labor which do not have a voice in terms of labor rights.
There is little known about nurturing environment that starts in the home where values are engrained (including the love of learning) and those that put into perspective the insistent consumerist advertisements in this age of globalization. We know little of the internal dynamics of Thai families in value formation. How do we spark the interest of students if they come from environments where parents themselves do not have education or were mis-educated by the same system that needs to be changed? What example can parents give to stimulate the love and passion for learning in their children if they themselves do not have it? Can Thais look back to a past that was steeped in scholarship like Vietnam? And what can be done to change the cultural and political milieu so that it encourages a thoughtful and more enquiring citizenry?
I am not an expert on educational reform. The way out of this dismal state of affairs has been argued to require strong, courageous and committed leadership to push for educational reforms (Nation, 2006b). Powerful vested interest with a stake in the status quo will not only resist but attempt to waylay any moves (Surachai Chupaka, 2002). Education reforms were a start-and-stop affair under the Thaksin administration where five education ministers came and went during its five and a half years in power which thus consequently failed to come up with coherent education reform programs (Nation, 2007b). I do know that this is a very complex and difficult objective, where planning strategies must be clear cut and phased realistically from the very beginning to reduce resistance to change, provide adequate resources and prevent the chaos of trying to achieve too much too soon (Nation, 2007c).
*How will contradictions be resolved? By exhortation or revolution in Thai society?
Stephen Cleary (2007) wrote of contradictions in the objectives of education reform in that it goes against the grain of Thai traditional values:
“The education authorities often contradict themselves. An official statement by Onec (National Scheme on Education) in 2002 read: "Thai people shall adopt desirable values and behaviour in accordance with the traditional ways of life". Meaning that not only should Thai students sit down, shut up and obey the teacher, they ought to also instinctively honour their elders and abide by everything they say.”
Let me end with these few tentative thoughts. Because of the complexity of educational reform that is interlinked to many aspects of the political economy and existing power structures of Thailand I am pessimistic about the future. But the undoing of the gains of Thailand in the past half a century of “development” precisely from the failure to improve the educational system is to think the unthinkable considering the social chaos and instability that may result.
I will do my best to persevere in my chosen profession although I must start from the realization and acceptance of my own limitations to alter history, or to change people's attitudes. Galileo’s saying that “you cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself” may be comforting for the present. Try and try as you may - but what if you consistently find that there is nothing?
References:
Bangkok Post (2004), “Lax Standards hurting education”. December 12.
Brimble, P. and Richard F. Doner (2007), University–Industry Linkages and Economic Development: The Case of Thailand, World Development, Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 1021–1036.
Cleary, Stephen (2007), “Don't panic, the kids are all right after all”, The Nation, June 23.
Daily Xpress(2008), “Wake up call for Thai Society”, March 11, The Nation
Eckardt, James (2008), “Downfall of the Sino-Thai families”, Nation, July 8.
Komolmas, Prathip M. , “New Trends in Higher Education Towards the 21st Century in Thailand”, www.journal.au.edu/abac_journal/jan99/article1.html
Nation (2002), “Education reform is the top priority”, January 1.
Nation (2004), “Much to learn from the humanities”, August 26.
Nation (2005), “55% of secondary schools fail grade”, November 5.
Nation (2006a), “Kids urged to read a lot”, May 7.
Nation (2006b), An 'F minus for education reform, June 6.
Nation (2007a), “Pongthep backed over coup question”, April 4.
Nation (2007b), “Education reforms must continue”, February 24.
Nation (2007c), Decentralisation key in education reforms, August 1.
Pasuk Phongpaichit and Chris Baker (eds.) (2008), Thai Capital After the 1997 Crisis, Bangkok: Silkworm Books.
Smythe, H.H. (1964), “Scholarship in Thailand: Arid, Stunted and Tradition Bound”, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 35, Issue 7, pp. 367-372, October.
Surachai Chupaka (2002) “Education reform is lying in tatters”, The Nation, Jan 23.
Sutichai Yoon (2001), Education reform: Does this gov’t have the Will?, The Nation, Opinion, February 22.
Suthichai Yoon (2006), “Why doesn't education get mega-project priority?” The Nation, June 8.
Templeton, Charles (2007), “A Personal Word”, in Hitchens, C., The Portable Athiest, Da Capo Press, 282-286.
What qualifies me to criticize the state of Thai education? Do I have motives other than to shed light on the problem, or do I have any ulterior motives, perhaps an axe to grind to avenge some injustice that may have been visited on me as a foreign lecturer?
I have been involved in the Thai University education system in one form or another as a ……. for nearly 9 years, in both undergraduate and graduate level in two of the top most state universities of the country. Moreover, I had also been involved in academic administration at the professional training level in an institute that is closely associated with universities locally and abroad.
I can assure you that the purpose for writing this piece is primarily to document and lay bare my thoughts that have grown from my frustration both as a father seeing my Thai daughters’ innate curiosity and sense of wonder progressively and irreversibly ebbing over the years and as a foreign Acharn struggling to earn his keep and finding the purpose of life within the Thai educational system. It is hoped that these thoughts can make a tiny contribution to the debate on how to improve the dire state of Thai education.
Many foreigners who have taught in Thailand have witnessed the weak educational backgrounds of students, their poor English skills and more importantly, their inability to think and think critically. In my view, the inability to think critically and engage in discussion is attributed wrongly to poor English skills. A deficiency in English language skills is used as a convenient excuse for not being able to understand the subject matter at hand. I wish to argue however that the inability to grasp a concept is not dependent solely on language skills if the curious and adept mind had been trained to think in its native language. Absent that, no amount of catching up in Western languages (through expensive tutoring) will have an impact in facilitating the raising of intellectual standards.
I am not a linguist, but I have been assured that trying to understand Buddhist Dhamma as it is written in Thai would require no less a concentrated effort to comprehend at an intellectual level (much easier I suppose than actually practicing its tenets in life) as would trying to make sense of a philosophical treatise by a Western philosopher. From experience, the problem of Thai students going one evolutionary step above the basic literacy tenets of “read and write” to “grow, to develop some intellectual sinew” (Templeton, 2007:283) stems much deeper than having an acceptable or high level of English skills. Even if Thai students chose to use Thai these same students cannot demonstrate that they can clearly formulate their thoughts, much less write intelligibly. This is not a jaundiced observation of a foreigner who may have felt wronged or imagined receiving shabby treatment by Thai superiors (another story) but was in fact told so by an esteemed Thai colleague in a prestigious university. Writing and thinking can be honed independent of the language chosen to express thoughts in the mind.
Another unforgettable experience I’ve encountered in a reputable graduate program was to discover that most Thai graduate students would take an hour to read a single page from an assigned article in an English journal, taking a protracted amount of time referring back and forth to a dictionary as if word for word translation could facilitate comprehension of concepts that they were ill prepared to grasp (even at the basic minimum level) in the first place. The argument that the weakness in thinking skills among Thai students is somehow related to poor English language skills further loses its cogency when I ask students from other nationalities in class. For example, whenever I ask Vietnamese students whose English skills are as rudimentary as their Thai counterparts, they are able to formulate an intelligible answer either with the assistance of their compatriots who fill in the missing English words that they are at a loss or through their persistent attempts to find the English translation of their thoughts created in their native language from the dictionary. It is clear from the “keywords” in the ensuing translation that their thinking went through a “processing phase” rather than merely information recognition that would have at best regurgitated the information back to the lecturer. The latter would have been identifiable with my Thai graduate students who were likely to have perfect recall of the passage (even its text location) but could not explain what it meant. Thai students were more often than not at a loss to interpret the meaning, the interrelationship(s) of the idea(s) with prior concept(s), and/or its significance for the subject matter at hand. In plain terms, Thai students seem to be unable to make the rich mental connections that would “connect the dots” into some recognizable pattern. Of course this does not prove that Vietnamese students are brighter than Thai students. We would have to control the selection (& admissions) process for that in order to say something more definitive than this reporting. And we would also have to consider the rare exception among Thai graduate students who show motivation and originality, which does indeed occur though rarely.
It is even more frustrating when I teach undergraduate students who are less mature than those in graduate school. Few show interest while others sit impassively or doze off in class where the lessons require conceptual understanding, analytical thinking and synthesis. It is therefore the kind of class that is the complete opposite of what they have been traditionally exposed to, namely rote learning* that produces a state of mind that is more accustomed to superficiality (mai tong kit lerk, mai tong lai la eyat) that is then expressed in a demeanor that is the closest incarnation of Kundera’s “unbearable lightness of being”. I honestly suspect that this quintessential Thainess remains as one of the most incomprehensibly disarming traits that intrigue the jaded and cynical farangs who first arrive on this land of smiles. I require the students to bring a dictionary so that we can consult it together for new words that come up during discussion. When a new English word comes up however, most take a lackadaisical approach to opening the dictionary evoking what appears as total disinterestedness in the task at hand. During discussions, students are visibly distracted by a lethargy that in this type of university would be inconceivable to attribute to malnutrition. On the contrary, I am convinced more than ever that it is strong evidence of malnutrition of the mind.
*Can one ask a critical question in a Law School exam?
That the practice of asking critical questions (in relation to critical thinking) is supremely alien to the experience of Thai students is aptly demonstrated in this vignette. Some law students from Thammasat University complained to the daily newspaper Thai Post that a question that appeared in their final exam on March 11, 2007 made them feel uncomfortable. The seemingly innocuous question that was considered discomfiting asked: "If you are a judge and you were invited by coup makers to work for them for a salary more than you receive now, will you accept the work or not and why?" No doubt the context of such a question was suggestively subversive to those loyal to the military government that deposed the Thai Rak Thai party (TRT) of Mr. Taksin because the question was asked by Pongthep Thepkanjana, a special lecturer in the Law Dept of Thammasat University who no less was also the Deputy TRT Party leader. Were it not for the full backing of the chairman of the Thammasat University Lecturer Council, Kittisak Prokkati on grounds of academic freedom the case would have pushed Thailand to one of its laughable heights of political folly. (Nation, 2007a)
One would surely be guilty of making the foolish conclusion that there is something “inherently” wrong with Thais - that they are unable to carry an intelligent conversation or think in a critical manner. This is pure rubbish. This is clearly disproven by Thai students who are educated abroad as could be typical in the old or new elite families. Indeed, they not only speak English fluently but are equally as able as their western counterparts to hold their own in intellectual discussion, banter and debate. But these are few and far between. It is a rare Thai, student or otherwise who can rise above inane pop culture, their narrow inwardly focused “Thainess”, keep up to date with developments in neighboring countries, and particularly with gray area issues that cannot be approached with absolutist style of thinking (e.g., secret CIA prisons in Thailand, global terror, global warming, peak oil, Iran’s nuclear program, etc.). In short, finding a Thai student with a “going global” mindset is difficult indeed. Again, I wish to make myself crystal clear that this is by no means a derogatory remark on Thais nor is this to suggest inherent inferiority. Similar if not worse cases of ignorance and in the extreme, xenophobia, can be found in other countries, such as America where the minds of many students and the “average” person have been addled and brainwashed by simplistic truisms published by the popular press.
Since the vagaries of keeping body and soul together have led me to a job saddled with the formidable task of forming the minds of future leaders in Thai society the challenge is therefore how to educate Thai students to the level of excellence required for survivability in this intensely competitive global world of the future that is here upon us now. An even greater and seemingly impossible goal is how to stimulate in these young minds a love, passion and an excitement for knowledge; knowledge for knowledge’s sake. The smug belief in Thai exceptionalism and “self-sufficiency” is no longer tenable. Many Thais (rural and urban alike) have already tasted the Promethean fire of capitalist development. It seems increasingly unlikely that a country that has had a long streak of good luck over the last half a century in terms of material development may continue to be providentially endowed with good fortune by beneficent “spirits”. As recent events have shown the underpinning political and social values are far from fully formed or adequate to carry Thailand forward towards a society of self-regulating and self-acting individuals living in a true democracy. The foundations of “democratic literacy” can only be built on solid ground by an enlightened education system that will produce independent thinking and politically mature Thai citizens. As Suthichai Yoon argued (2001), “a civil society can only come about if we get our education policy right.” The way forward can be found through citizenry engaging in debate and discussion without recourse to mindless exhortation to “unity” from above, mob rule or senseless violence as a way out when words and thinking fail to illuminate the path.
Education reform is perhaps one issue that Thai parents agree on and are concerned with. Thai families with the wherewithal have deliberately chosen not to send their kids to the moribund Thai education system. Instead they opt to make invaluable contributions to the educational coffers to the growing number of expensive local private schools and those in Australia, New Zealand and the UK.
We also hear clear expression of concerns from Thai leaders and bureaucrats. For example, on the occasion of the 22nd anniversary celebration of the Ministry for University Affairs’ foundation, Mr. Anand Panyarachun, a former Prime Minister, addressed a large gathering of academics on the question of quality of higher education. Some of the key points raised (Komolmas, 1999):
• low academic standards. lower than those of Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan
• graduates have poor command of the English language
• lack of right understanding of basic concept of democracy among the faculty, staff and students
• faculty members being narrow-minded cannot cooperate together
• though the university is a community of scholars but the faculty have slavish mentality
Nine years later, in March 2008, among the items in the “worrying report” by Ampon Kittiampon, permanent secretary of the National Economic and Social Development Board on the state of Thai society during the fourth quarter of 2007 (October to December) is the quality of education* that continues to fall in the key areas of reading, mathematics and science (Daily Xpress, 2008).
*Low quality education = Low quality politicians
Suthichai Yoon (2001) wrote in an editorial piece the following:
"In 2001, in the heady days of the first term of Prime Minister Taksin, there was much hope in the earnest new education minister, Kasem Wattanachai who declared on his first day of work that that the quota of "privileged" students being allowed to enter primary and secondary schools must be curbed.
We now are saddled with an education system that ignores the vital values of transparency and honesty - that teaches students that creative thinking and imaginative exchanges of ideas are equivalent to risk-taking which should be avoided at all costs. Is there any doubt, then, that the quality of our national politics remains so deplorable? Did it surprise anybody when Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra complained the other day that he had difficulty locating good, qualified candidates for the Cabinet "because we don't have enough of a supply of good and wise people to pick from"? "
In a seminar on education reform sponsored by the Ministry of Education in Pattaya in 2006, caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisang addressing teachers and students from 2,000 schools criticized rote learning and defended the use of open-ended questions (Nation, 2006a). Teachers were told that they should let students explain their selection of reading material and report what it is about, so as to improve their skill in catching the gist of the contents. Reading comprehension was said to be lacking among university students due to limited practice at lower educational levels (Nation, 2006a).
From whence does this state of affairs come from? There are deep historical reasons for the dire state of Thai education that have congealed and solidified into intractable institutional structures that would require strong political will to overturn. Let us not forget that Thailand did not experience the psychic dislocations and humiliations of having been colonized by Western powers. By maintaining its independence the elites and rulers were able to fashion the historical trajectory and development policies of their country with much greater independence than nationalist leaders of newly independent states who carried a heavy psychological, political, institutional and economic baggage from the colonial into the post colonial era. Not having to go through a nationalist anti-colonial movement, there is no equivalent of the momentous breaking-of- chains revolutionary event in Thai mentality. It should come as no earthshaking surprise that one of the accumulated tendencies arising from the continuity in Thailand’s fortuitous history resulted in conservative education policies that sought to reinforce the triumvirate symbols of Thainess – Nation, Religion and King. This meant the continuing stifling influence of the sakdina (feudal hierarchical social structure) mentality combined with the heavily centralized system of government that ensued from the reforms brought about by Chulalongkorn as the last bulwark against invasion by the British and French colonial powers when he run out of buffer concessions. To this day and perhaps for the generations of Thais that lived through the 20th century, mental capacities as well as initiative in terms of independent thinking, reasoning and volition were stunted. Thais were ruled by a succession of paternalistic rulers with varying degrees of enlightenment and ignorance (monarchs, military dictators) who issued edicts, orders and proclamations. In essence, the elites thought for the people. It was not in the rulers’ interest that their subjects had the capacity to think independently for themselves but to accept the natural order of things as foreordained by (wrongful) dhammic interpretations of merit and karma from previous lives. Anything foreign and alien to elite definition of “Thainess” was shunned and considered irrelevant, even dangerous. Subjects listen, obey and willingly accept their fate. The freedom of slaves in the last part of the 19th century was bestowed through an edict rather than fought for in an heroic act of rebellion.
The vestiges of the long tradition of absolute monarchy refused to vanish completely even after it was ended by an elite led rebellion (rather than a popular one). Authority that emanated from righteous rule morphed into an unprecedented form of control by military dictators using the repressive methods of authoritarian militarism. Field Marshal Plaek Phibun Songkram pretentions included large doses of absolutism behind his modernizing façade (remember his cultural edicts?). When the Prapass/Thanom dictatorship took power and restored the monarchy to support their legitimacy, the young monarch was quick to use the opportunity to restore traditional rituals and ceremonies of old to reestablish the preeminent ideological position of the monarchy in people’s mind. This benign, enlightened but paternalistic monarch cultivated its symbolic image to the hilt by righteous rule and adept use of the media that disseminated widely the propaganda that tireless benevolent rule helped improve the lives of the poor in rural areas. The monarch’s moral stature grew rapidly that he is often called upon to intervene at major historical junctures to restore stability whenever the country is pushed to the brink of chaos and bloodshed. He has earned the moral power and authority to bring together the most warring and blood thirsty leaders to compromise for the good of the country.
The seeds of a fledgling democracy fell however on feudal and authoritarian tainted grounds. The response to the refreshing beginning of freedom in the early 70s was unprecedented violence after the liberating manifestation of cathartic release of people’s pent up grievances proved to be a serious threat not only the status quo but also the imperial power of the US that had encroached into Thailand as part of its foolish and costly belief in the domino theory of communism in Southeast Asia.
With this cursory background, it’s no wonder then that it was not in the general interest of the elites to change the education system in Thailand. It benefitted them to have a politically juvenile population of workers and citizens who would not question the status quo nor demand more than their meager share of the profits of a rising industrial economy. Is it any wonder that in the present time the budgetary structure of the Ministry of Education has a highly lopsided almost 80 percent set aside for administrative costs - 15-17 percent goes to teachers' salaries and the rest to construction and the purchase of hardware. Only 3.5 per cent is devoted to actual educational development (Suthichai Yoon, 2006). Is it any wonder why with great frustration I witnessed my two daughters’ natural curiosity and sense of wonder in nursery school grew progressively dimmed as they progressed through elementary and high school (enrolled in one of the best private religious schools in Bangkok)? When their grades were not improving in math and science I inquired if they ask questions in class when they did not understand. Little did I know then about how the Thai system smothers curiosity when I was told “if I ask, the teacher will get angry with me”. Children thus quickly learn to dissimulate by not listening in rapt attention but by distracted talkativeness or mute silence in class. In the process of appearing to understand their sense of wonder of the universe dies. I think this is the intellectual equivalent of “soul murder” that the psychologist Leo Buscaglia referred to when a child is abused emotionally. And since there is no democratic forum in the school for parents to complain (that will cause the responsible to lose “face”) the only coping mechanism is for children who understand precisely that their teachers did not master the lesson plan themselves to internalize the self same methods of teachers – which is by memorization. Now I understand why educational reformists are calling for a change from “teacher centered” to “student centered” education. In my wildest dreams, I may still be proven correct that we should change the “wai kru” (honoring teachers) to “wai naksuksa” (honoring students) ceremony since they are after all the future leaders of this country. Now, that would be truly radical!
It is also no wonder that most Thai teachers place no value whatsoever on critical thinking and keeping an open mind. As Cleary (2007) put it perhaps not too exaggeratedly: “From the first grade, students are taught to "repeat after me", recite a few sums, and believe every word that comes out of their teachers' mouths in quiet obedience. Should one of them even dare to question a teacher, he will be on the receiving end of a boot out the door.” Ignorance is bliss. In my undergraduate classes for example, I get blank expressions when I ask “why” type of questions to stimulate students to think critically. I got slightly less blank expressions but still silence when once I intentionally challenged my students to think that rather than blaming the Burmese (as Thais are wont to do from reading the account of their history books) to reflect instead on whether the sacking of Ayutthaya by the Burmese could have been the result of poor thinking skills and faulty planning by Thai soldiers at that time? The same as the Thai Lao border skirmish in the 1980s where the much better equipped Thai army could not defeat the ragtag Laotian soldiers. I thought I was stirring a hornet’s nest by raising a rather provocative question but received instead cold indifference. It is the same telltale predictable reaction. How do I encourage a love of reading when in an informal poll of students in class only a handful even read the opinion pieces (e.g. editorials) in Thai language newspapers?
The most frustrating part about having to teach undergraduates or graduate students for that matter is the realization that Acharns are on the receiving end of a deeply flawed antiquated education system that begins from day one in kindergarten school. The prospect of having to take the responsibility to repair the damage wrought on students’ minds is overwhelming and can strain the most dedicated of Acharns who by trial and error (& sleepless nights) attempts all kinds of innovations to present an entertaining “dog and pony show” in class so that students don’t lose interest because the subject matter is beyond them. I have already made the decision that I am not going to be a party to the dumbing down of the lessons but instead try to simplify the explanation in the simplest language possible in English. Immaturity plus incompetence in students maybe a surefire formula to inspire challenge among dedicated Acharns but at the same can be a source of great disappointment if no amount of effort on the Acharn’s part can spark the passion for learning in these implacable students.
It has been reported that the real problem originates in the government high schools where it is impossible for any student to fail any subject. The refusal to apply firm standards by teachers in perhaps a misguided wishy-washy manifestation of the Buddhist “middle path” as in the practice of giving students three or four tries at their exams until teachers get frustrated enough to them an easy project and pass them to go to the next level (Bangkok Post, 2004). It would appear that the problem is particularly acute in public high schools in the provinces. According to a report by the Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA) fifty-five per cent of secondary schools across the country, mostly small-scale government-run institutions, have failed national educational standard requirements. The remaining forty-five percent of the schools are either prestigious or located in Bangkok or other urban areas (Nation, 2005). The same report revealed that most students lacked analytical skills and failed to meet requirements in basic academic proficiency: the average score of six graders in mathematics was 44 per cent, 42 per cent in science, and below 50 per cent in Thai. Ninth graders need extra tutorials because they cannot achieve reading comprehension on their own, and vocational school students have to be given basic training by their employers (Nation, 2005).
Additional relevant observations that I have picked up first hand are the following:
• the proclivity of Thai university administration officials to put more emphasis on showy* physical infrastructure investments (i.e., new buildings) and non-essential technology (like high tech library systems) over investments to build first class libraries (replete with books, data bases, electronic journals) and laboratories. In the contest of appearance versus substance, appearance always wins in Thailand (“phak chee roy na”). There is a suggestion that the predilection for these bulky investments are underpinned by the budget approval procedures of the Budget Bureau, although it is also not unknown to hear whispers of lucrative commissions received under the table for huge construction projects (compared to say buying books). There should then be some kind of university ombudsman in the Ministry of Education who is responsible for investigating complaints of wrongdoing by high level university or institute administrators. Still, I cannot help but imagine what the alternative would be like: ordinary buildings but first class libraries – how much difference that would play in nudging the Thai academic illuminati” to stay abreast and make a substantive (not to say the least, original) contribution to advancing the state of the art in their respective fields of study!!! Thailand’s academic world may have leapfrogged the situation in 1964 when Smythe’s (1964) characterized scholarship in Thailand as “arid, stunted and tradition bound” but there is still a yawning gap in terms of achieving a critical mass of “progressive-minded, scholarly oriented” (p.371) academics holding court in a more intellectually open and questioning academia that would fan further the “intellectual fires” (p. 372) more coincident to the level of Thailand’s wealth and democratic opening 44 years later.
• The emphasis on science (in the name of increasing Thailand’s competitiveness) has become so prominent (I would guess even at high school level) that it has, according to Suwanna Satha-anan, a professor of philosophy, suffocated the humanities to a point that is potentially dangerous, trapping people in linear modes of thinking that she describes as “the one truth” (Nation, 2004). The mechanical mode of thinking cannot be ameliorated if reading skills to deepen substantive knowledge of theories and synthesis of conceptual debates leave a lot to be desired. Hence, the default is to undertake quantitative analysis devoid of theoretical content or relevance. I fondly recall an esteemed colleague (also a foreigner who graduated from a prestigious American Ivy League University) who was consulted by a thesis advisee if there was another statistical model that he could use that could improve the R-square (correlation coefficient) of the logistic regression model he was using for his master’s thesis.
• Inadequate reward or incentive system for Acharns in the university. Research funding has improved with the availability of the Kanchanapisek Research Fund, but unless there is a corresponding critical mass of library materials for scholars to read to keep up to date and advance the state of knowledge, research usually gets bogged down in baseline data collection of the rankest empiricist mode devoid of theoretical significance. I remember for example a huge longitudinal survey conducted by our school in which the design of the survey instrument was settled by a “committee” approach that predictably resulted in a meaningless hodgepodge of unrelated questions that had no theoretical framework. My foreign colleague and I promptly withdrew from membership fearful that whatever good name we had might get soiled from this pointless empirical research. This state of affairs unfortunately reinforces the gross disparity in the international research division of labor – local universities conduct the data collection (& earn money) but the interpretation, synthesis and implications for theory (the intellectual valued added) are conducted by their western counterparts abroad.
• Promotion standards must be intimately linked with research rather than administrative experience in organizing seminars or short course training, or obtaining external funds. Those Acharns who excel in and prefer this type of endeavors must be put in an administrative career track rather than an academic career track for the sake of equity.
• Acharns should be expected to show by example that education is a lifelong learning process. Tales of Acharns never again opening a book once they return to Thailand from their Phd training abroad are unfortunately true as borne out by an incident I witnessed of a Thai colleague (a senior Acharn of director level) reading forlornly one of the “Chicken Soup for the Soul” series while waiting in an Australian airport for a return trip to Bangkok. I consoled myself that at least this Acharn was not reading “Reader’s Digest”. This is again directly related to the weak structure of incentives that promote research excellence and the supporting infrastructure of at the very least, a near world class library so that Acharns can keep up to date with the state of the art in their fields.
• One conundrum that works against teaching in English is Thai national pride and a belief in a self-contained country that is able to function without the use of the English language. It is therefore difficult to convince Thai students of the value of using English by appealing to the abstract reality of globalization and fierce global competition without the full support at the highest levels of the Education Ministry and the leaders of the country. This comes at a time when the Sino-Thai tycoons and captains of industry are no longer in the forefront (or have the interest in) of strengthening and deepening Thai industrialization but instead concentrate on the service sector while surrendering the backbone of Thai industrialization to multinationals (Eckardt, 2008). There appears to be little thought given to the putative value of English in the future careers of students, particularly in the instrumental value of the humanities for the future in terms of employability in the coming new structure of jobs (whose configuration will increasingly be determined by multinational investors) as well as the role of the humanities in helping them achieve personal meaning and satisfaction in their lives and careers. Let it be said however, that we should squarely face the possibility that Thailand will end up being a “failed state” if education reform fails.
*“phak chee roy na” – or the fine Thai art of garnishing.
This practice of prettifying is mysteriously ingrained in the Thai psyche. An editorial published in the Nation, entitled “Education reform is the top priority” published Jan 1, 2002 clearly illustrates the foolishness of what may have been good but misguided intentions:
“Nothing sums it up better than the disclosure in a recent international survey - that we have one of the biggest education budgets, only to use the money like fools, wasting it on fences, signs and flag poles.”
So is there any hope for successful remedial effort to reverse the damage wrought by Thai education at the university level? First and foremost, the structural obstacles have to be addressed first by serious political will to overhaul (not simply reform) the educational system which has been paralyzed not only by backward philosophies and standards but also by a “corruption-prone and inefficient bureaucracy” (Yoon, 2001). All the lofty objectives befitting a modern education system more suited to the new millennium have been enunciated in the objectives of the National Education Act of 1999 that “incorporated all of the hopes for the future” (Nation, 2007b). This act provided a roadmap for drastic education reform (Yoon, 2001):
First, enhance learners' quality of life by enabling them to pursue lifelong learning, and to develop their analytical and critical thinking as well as practical work. (italics added)
Second, improve the structure and method of educational administration along with management of resources to better serve people in local communities.
Third, improve the system for teacher training and improve teaching standards.
Fourth, standardise and improve the quality of education through rigorous evaluation and monitoring.”
What will it take to realize the objectives of the National Education Act of 1999? Note however that the first objective presupposes that there is a welcoming environment in place for “critical thinking”. Can reform objectives solve its contradictory goals* with long established authoritarian and paternalistic patterns in Thai culture? It is to be expected that further industrialization will rend asunder the hold of tradition on the minds of people. However continuous attachment to the present Thai model of taking advantage of globalization by providing services to multinationals may eventually find limits in the ability of Thais to exercise effective control of its development direction (Pasuk and Baker, 2008). Absent the “creative destruction” of further cycles of rapid capitalist development, where will the pressure to “modernize” Thai society come from? There is however a real danger that the push for an enlightened citizenry may prove the undoing of the development model of Thailand which has been based on a docile cheap and not-so-cheap anymore labor which do not have a voice in terms of labor rights.
There is little known about nurturing environment that starts in the home where values are engrained (including the love of learning) and those that put into perspective the insistent consumerist advertisements in this age of globalization. We know little of the internal dynamics of Thai families in value formation. How do we spark the interest of students if they come from environments where parents themselves do not have education or were mis-educated by the same system that needs to be changed? What example can parents give to stimulate the love and passion for learning in their children if they themselves do not have it? Can Thais look back to a past that was steeped in scholarship like Vietnam? And what can be done to change the cultural and political milieu so that it encourages a thoughtful and more enquiring citizenry?
I am not an expert on educational reform. The way out of this dismal state of affairs has been argued to require strong, courageous and committed leadership to push for educational reforms (Nation, 2006b). Powerful vested interest with a stake in the status quo will not only resist but attempt to waylay any moves (Surachai Chupaka, 2002). Education reforms were a start-and-stop affair under the Thaksin administration where five education ministers came and went during its five and a half years in power which thus consequently failed to come up with coherent education reform programs (Nation, 2007b). I do know that this is a very complex and difficult objective, where planning strategies must be clear cut and phased realistically from the very beginning to reduce resistance to change, provide adequate resources and prevent the chaos of trying to achieve too much too soon (Nation, 2007c).
*How will contradictions be resolved? By exhortation or revolution in Thai society?
Stephen Cleary (2007) wrote of contradictions in the objectives of education reform in that it goes against the grain of Thai traditional values:
“The education authorities often contradict themselves. An official statement by Onec (National Scheme on Education) in 2002 read: "Thai people shall adopt desirable values and behaviour in accordance with the traditional ways of life". Meaning that not only should Thai students sit down, shut up and obey the teacher, they ought to also instinctively honour their elders and abide by everything they say.”
Let me end with these few tentative thoughts. Because of the complexity of educational reform that is interlinked to many aspects of the political economy and existing power structures of Thailand I am pessimistic about the future. But the undoing of the gains of Thailand in the past half a century of “development” precisely from the failure to improve the educational system is to think the unthinkable considering the social chaos and instability that may result.
I will do my best to persevere in my chosen profession although I must start from the realization and acceptance of my own limitations to alter history, or to change people's attitudes. Galileo’s saying that “you cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself” may be comforting for the present. Try and try as you may - but what if you consistently find that there is nothing?
References:
Bangkok Post (2004), “Lax Standards hurting education”. December 12.
Brimble, P. and Richard F. Doner (2007), University–Industry Linkages and Economic Development: The Case of Thailand, World Development, Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 1021–1036.
Cleary, Stephen (2007), “Don't panic, the kids are all right after all”, The Nation, June 23.
Daily Xpress(2008), “Wake up call for Thai Society”, March 11, The Nation
Eckardt, James (2008), “Downfall of the Sino-Thai families”, Nation, July 8.
Komolmas, Prathip M. , “New Trends in Higher Education Towards the 21st Century in Thailand”, www.journal.au.edu/abac_journal/jan99/article1.html
Nation (2002), “Education reform is the top priority”, January 1.
Nation (2004), “Much to learn from the humanities”, August 26.
Nation (2005), “55% of secondary schools fail grade”, November 5.
Nation (2006a), “Kids urged to read a lot”, May 7.
Nation (2006b), An 'F minus for education reform, June 6.
Nation (2007a), “Pongthep backed over coup question”, April 4.
Nation (2007b), “Education reforms must continue”, February 24.
Nation (2007c), Decentralisation key in education reforms, August 1.
Pasuk Phongpaichit and Chris Baker (eds.) (2008), Thai Capital After the 1997 Crisis, Bangkok: Silkworm Books.
Smythe, H.H. (1964), “Scholarship in Thailand: Arid, Stunted and Tradition Bound”, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 35, Issue 7, pp. 367-372, October.
Surachai Chupaka (2002) “Education reform is lying in tatters”, The Nation, Jan 23.
Sutichai Yoon (2001), Education reform: Does this gov’t have the Will?, The Nation, Opinion, February 22.
Suthichai Yoon (2006), “Why doesn't education get mega-project priority?” The Nation, June 8.
Templeton, Charles (2007), “A Personal Word”, in Hitchens, C., The Portable Athiest, Da Capo Press, 282-286.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
there is always a first time
This is the inaugural piece of my blog. Being a neophyte in this business, I obviously don’t know what to say and where to start. I do feel however like standing at the edge of a precipice with a voice behind me shouting “jump”. The loud reverberating echoes are insistent. I take the plunge into the great unknown before the last faint echo. There is no turning back.
Is this a confessional? Why do people put up a “web log”? Are we would be Captain Kirks on a virtual Enterprise trekking through the boundless spaces of the universe hoping we might chance upon some kind of extraterrestrial “intelligent” life? An unanswered question that I have yet to find satisfactory answers in the phenomenon and wonder called the Internet. I see these possibilities – an opportunity for instant publishing for the more cerebral types, a spilling of guts for the alienated who think they have found a congenial home in the anonymity of the Internet, or plainly, a conveniently ethereal sounding board for those who have the unexplainable urge to speak and be heard. How many people read your blog (or will read mine)? Does it matter?
Why do you read blogs? Is there an educational value to these writings, ramblings and rantings? What sustains a blog in the cacophony of voices similarly eager to be heard or establish their mark if need be, in one outrageous form or another? There are perhaps countless virtual communities of shared interests, thoughts, ideology, inclinations, values that give people a fora for expressing (or “sharing”) their ideas, and for the brave hearts - their well reasoned arguments or polemics. Should people respond positively or negatively, what then? Am I supposed to feel a sense of community, validation, even purpose in life?
I write perhaps from the need to express myself more clearly. In today’s world of sound bites and shallow manipulative news reporting we seem to be regressing to a high technology but uncivilized society, where the art of writing is fast disappearing as our ability to comprehend and synthesize the world grows less and less as events unfold in rapid succession. We live discontinuous and incomprehensible lives, a “future shock” that has not only arrived but fully engulfs us with the result that we develop ever shorter attention spans. The numbness is no longer excruciating. The “big picture” recedes farther and farther from our grasp. I have been led to believe that writing can help us make sense of our world. But it is a difficult art that can only be cultivated through practice in the same way that we develop our minds through reading, and reading voraciously. Only through persistent practice may we someday achieve the facility of writing euphoniously and experience the sublime joy of seeing our thoughts come magnificently alive in words.
From the edge of the precipice, I fall headlong as a “freely falling body” just like it was described in high school and college physics with that strange sounding acceleration squared coefficient. I dream of reaching a parallel universe where good triumphs over evil and justice prevails. I leave the “peace on earth” part to Miss Universe contestants.
Is this a confessional? Why do people put up a “web log”? Are we would be Captain Kirks on a virtual Enterprise trekking through the boundless spaces of the universe hoping we might chance upon some kind of extraterrestrial “intelligent” life? An unanswered question that I have yet to find satisfactory answers in the phenomenon and wonder called the Internet. I see these possibilities – an opportunity for instant publishing for the more cerebral types, a spilling of guts for the alienated who think they have found a congenial home in the anonymity of the Internet, or plainly, a conveniently ethereal sounding board for those who have the unexplainable urge to speak and be heard. How many people read your blog (or will read mine)? Does it matter?
Why do you read blogs? Is there an educational value to these writings, ramblings and rantings? What sustains a blog in the cacophony of voices similarly eager to be heard or establish their mark if need be, in one outrageous form or another? There are perhaps countless virtual communities of shared interests, thoughts, ideology, inclinations, values that give people a fora for expressing (or “sharing”) their ideas, and for the brave hearts - their well reasoned arguments or polemics. Should people respond positively or negatively, what then? Am I supposed to feel a sense of community, validation, even purpose in life?
I write perhaps from the need to express myself more clearly. In today’s world of sound bites and shallow manipulative news reporting we seem to be regressing to a high technology but uncivilized society, where the art of writing is fast disappearing as our ability to comprehend and synthesize the world grows less and less as events unfold in rapid succession. We live discontinuous and incomprehensible lives, a “future shock” that has not only arrived but fully engulfs us with the result that we develop ever shorter attention spans. The numbness is no longer excruciating. The “big picture” recedes farther and farther from our grasp. I have been led to believe that writing can help us make sense of our world. But it is a difficult art that can only be cultivated through practice in the same way that we develop our minds through reading, and reading voraciously. Only through persistent practice may we someday achieve the facility of writing euphoniously and experience the sublime joy of seeing our thoughts come magnificently alive in words.
From the edge of the precipice, I fall headlong as a “freely falling body” just like it was described in high school and college physics with that strange sounding acceleration squared coefficient. I dream of reaching a parallel universe where good triumphs over evil and justice prevails. I leave the “peace on earth” part to Miss Universe contestants.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
