October 6, 2024: As Thailand remembers one of its darkest days, it is also reminded of stark contrasts between then and now.
What happened exactly 48 years ago dented the “Land of Smiles” image badly and provided one of the biggest life lessons for practically everyone. Fighters then gunned for “equality” for the ordinary people and so do their present-day counterparts, but it was the shadow of Karl Marx at the time and it is democracy/capitalism nowadays.
Who should we believe? If the Marxism people were wrong then today’s activists must be right, and vice versa.
We know one thing for certain, which is that any ideology is slippery. Ideological students denounced “Ugly Americans” in those days (because we are young and know better) but their grandchildren are begging to differ and most of them are frowning on Russia and China instead (again, because we are young and know better).
To cut a long story short, before October 6, 1976, a large number of leftists, including students, workers and other activists had been holding vociferous protests or demonstrations against the return from exile of former dictator Thanom Kittikachorn, whose much-hated government crumbled in the October 14, 1973 uprising.
The focus on Thanom, however, turned into a proxy in an escalating ideological conflict, with idealistic demands and issues stacking up and conservative anxiety rocketing about ballooning political influences of strongly-united student activists.
The rest is history, one of Thailand’s saddest events. Angry mobs stormed the Thammasat University, killing and injuring protesting students. Countless activists subsequently joined the communist insurgents in the jungles.
While we Thais reluctantly remembers one of our gloomiest days, we actually want to lock it up in the box of unwanted history. Yet although time changes and ideologies evolve, one fact is unchangeable, which is that revolution and counter-revolution are always accompanied by violence.
Bad news: We are not the friendliest
October 5, 2024: Countless social media clips featuring westerners saying they were “duped” by unpleasant portrayals of Thailand in their own countries apparently helped little, as Bangkok has been named just the fourth friendliest city in the world.
At the first glance, it seems like a big achievement being only after Singapore (1st), Sydney (2nd) and Las Vegas (3rd) in a long, new list of friendly cities, but we are the Land of Smiles for crying out loud. That calls for a bit of entitlement, doesn’t it?
The list was determined by Condé Nast Traveler’s readers, who constituted a credible survey. Several Asian cities have been lauded as the friendliest, but an interesting fact is that while Thailand came third in the “friendliest countries” category, Bangkok was fourth.
So, aside from being behind Singapore, Sydney and Las Vegas, Bangkok appears to have been perceived as comparatively less warm than the rest of Thailand.
This flies in the face of favourable social media content concerning Bangkok and Thais in general. Clips generating hundreds of thousands of views on YouTube highlighted how western tourists thought they were fooled by mainstream reports depicting Thailand as a backwater where visitors must take considerable precautions.
Friendliness is the biggest message in those clips, with western visitors to Bangkok and other parts of Thailand saying they have never found such an overwhelming hospitality anywhere else, even in their own countries. They all said they have never witnessed so much smiling willingness to help foreigners before.
Bangkok and Tokyo (6th) being relatively less friendly than Las Vegas is understandable, though. If they want your money, they always come with big grins and polite gestures.
People’s Party: We won’t weaponise justice against PM
October 4, 2024: If we act against the prime minister, it will not be through the National Anti-Corruption Commission or the Constitutional Court, the main opposition camp has promised.
The assurance from the People’s Party’s secretary-general was apparently based on its “belief” that independent agencies were prone to abuse and hence it will look hypocritical if the party seeks to overthrow Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra using the apparatus.
The key message from Sarayut Jailak, therefore, is that a non-parliamentary downfall of Paetongtarn will not be the responsibility of the People’s Party.
He strongly suggested, though, that Paetongtarn should enjoy it while it lasts, because nothing would stop his party from being able to form a single-party government after the next election.
His comment about Paetongtarn followed reporters’ expression of curiosity regarding why it seemed the People’s Party never went all-out against the prime minister and her father Thaksin Shinawatra, who many “democracy” lovers say was a victim of political persecution.
From Gaza to Lebanon and back to Israel and then potentially Iran
October 3, 2024: Israel and Iran have been physically and verbally quarrelling for much of the past five decades, but this is the moment where bystanders seriously run for cover.
Pro-Israel media have played down damage caused by Iranian missile attacks on Israel earlier this week, whereas the other side has claimed the opposite, saying the assaults have shown how the “Iron Dome” (Israel’s much-proclaimed air defense system) was overrated.
Whatever the truth is, Israel will definitely respond, and its leader Benjamin Netanyahu said Iran would pay a very heavy price. To add to that, Israel’s allies have been more united behind it than when the innocent Gazans died in large numbers or when Israel and Iran were engaged in previous standoffs.
At first, the world prayed for Gaza and it also prayed that the war did not spread from the territory. Then Lebanon was attacked, and after that Iran fired its missiles, prompting a revenge vow from Israel and no-nonsense pledge of support from the United States.
Let’s give them biggest honour
October 2, 2024: The nation has become sadly harmonised, and that’s the least yet perhaps most meaningful thing Thailand can do for the pure school souls.
For once, newscasters are in gloomy unison without a shred of sarcasm. For once, the social media think truly about others and not themselves. For once, the politicians are sincerely solemn.
We can’t reverse the immense and tragic loss, but we can still give those who have passed away the best honour we can possibly give them. And there is no bigger honour than making the earnest empathy evident at this very moment last.
It will be extremely difficult, especially when the situation might seem to require finding who was (or were) at fault, but we must try.
Pros and cons of “Double Majority”
October 1, 2024: If a country wants to change its Constitution, how many of its citizens have to give consent?
The logical answer is the majority, of course.
The simplicity stops there. The Senate and the House of Representatives disagree with each other over what actually constitutes majority agreement on whether the charter should be or should not be changed.
The Senate thinks more than half of eligible voters have to be involved in saying whether they want changes or not, and then what more than half of those involved think will decide “Yes” or “No” wins. They call it “Double Majority”.
Reasonable, proponents say. If more than half of eligible voters stay home, there is no point making changes that the “majority of Thais” is not interested in. Is it fair to effect constitutional changes that only 20 million people in a 71-million-people nation want?
Much ado about nothing and possibly time-consuming, the opponents argue. How can you give “lazy” people who choose to stay home the right to determine the country’s future? To add to that, if they are dragged out of their homes to vote, they may even vote “Yes (I do want changes)”, which is a huge irony if their absence cancels the whole amendment process.
Also, the proponents say many countries adhere to the “Double Majority” when it comes to public referendums. Check it out, the opponents insist, because most of those countries are republics (with possibly different or clashing needs and cultures) which is what makes “Double Majority” come in handy.
(With ideological divide considerably deep in Thailand, being a republic or not does not quite matter, though, some may argue.)
As for the matter of how long it takes, one side will say what’s the rush and the other will ask what the point is for the delay?
What do you think?
Daily updates of local and international events by Tulsathit Taptim.
