|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
maximmm
Joined: 01 Feb 2008
|
 Posted: Mon May 26, 2014 7:08 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Arguing for monarchy or democracy or oligarchy kind of misses the point. Its like debating whether God is one or many. Most Hindus would tell you he is both, and that's not the most interesting thing about God. |
Ok...I'll ask.
What is the most interesting thing about God? |
No. I won't let you derail this thread. |
Haha;) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Arguing for monarchy or democracy or oligarchy kind of misses the point. Its like debating whether God is one or many. Most Hindus would tell you he is both, and that's not the most interesting thing about God. |
Ok...I'll ask.
What is the most interesting thing about God? |
No. I won't let you derail this thread. The point is that whether God is one or many does not approach what is significant about what God is or what he would mean to mankind. Likewise, the democracy v oligarchy v monarchy debate is a false one.
You're an avid atheist. Does it matter to you whether someone believes in the Greek pantheon or a Christian God? No, you demand whatever it is you demand. Likewise, the democracy v oligarchy v monarchy debate is a false one. |
Perhaps your analogy is false, and mostly just an inappropriately used opportunity to inject your simplistic world view.
Your point was easy to understand.
Why bring your god into it?
I demanded nothing.
You brought up a point and failed to follow through.
Carry on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 3:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Does it matter to you whether someone believes in the Greek pantheon or a Christian God? |
It matters to me. Anyone who seriously believes in the Greek pantheon (as opposed to just screwing around) surely shares the mores of those deities, which means they're likely to kill me, strip my body of its valuables, and then ransom my corpse. By contrast, the Christian will just annoy me by asking me if I know Jesus died for me.
But before you scold me for derailing the thread, here's the twist that makes it all relevant to the thread: the hypothetical Greek pantheon believer is a Thai red shirt protester. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 3:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Back on track, the military has evidently received the King's blessing, with the implication that that lends it some legitimacy. I wonder to what extent westerners are simply projecting their own political systems onto Thailand when they talk about "coups" and the like. If the King is truly supreme over the Constitution in the minds and hearts of the Thai people, then is the Constitution being revoked and a new one being made in Thailand truly of a character with the same thing happening in, say, America? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 3:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Back on track, the military has evidently received the King's blessing, with the implication that that lends it some legitimacy. I wonder to what extent westerners are simply projecting their own political systems onto Thailand when they talk about "coups" and the like. If the King is truly supreme over the Constitution in the minds and hearts of the Thai people, then is the Constitution being revoked and a new one being made in Thailand truly of a character with the same thing happening in, say, America? |
The bolded part...say what?
For some reason that question seems like a labyrinth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 3:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Back on track, the military has evidently received the King's blessing, with the implication that that lends it some legitimacy. I wonder to what extent westerners are simply projecting their own political systems onto Thailand when they talk about "coups" and the like. If the King is truly supreme over the Constitution in the minds and hearts of the Thai people, then is the Constitution being revoked and a new one being made in Thailand truly of a character with the same thing happening in, say, America? |
The bolded part...say what?
For some reason that question seems like a labyrinth. |
Sorry if I was unclear. In America, we view the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, so if the military were to simply overthrow the government and revoke the Constitution, we would feel a serious violation had occurred. But if the Thai people view the King as above their constitution, and the King blesses the revocation of their constitution, it seems to me that such a revocation occurring in Thailand is not exactly the same thing as if such a revocation occurred in America. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Back on track, the military has evidently received the King's blessing, with the implication that that lends it some legitimacy. I wonder to what extent westerners are simply projecting their own political systems onto Thailand when they talk about "coups" and the like. If the King is truly supreme over the Constitution in the minds and hearts of the Thai people, then is the Constitution being revoked and a new one being made in Thailand truly of a character with the same thing happening in, say, America? |
The bolded part...say what?
For some reason that question seems like a labyrinth. |
Sorry if I was unclear. In America, we view the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, so if the military were to simply overthrow the government and revoke the Constitution, we would feel a serious violation had occurred. But if the Thai people view the King as above their constitution, and the King blesses the revocation of their constitution, it seems to me that such a revocation occurring in Thailand is not exactly the same thing as if such a revocation occurred in America. |
Interesting take on it.
If your premise is correct, then I am inclined to agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
maximmm
Joined: 01 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Back on track, the military has evidently received the King's blessing, with the implication that that lends it some legitimacy. I wonder to what extent westerners are simply projecting their own political systems onto Thailand when they talk about "coups" and the like. If the King is truly supreme over the Constitution in the minds and hearts of the Thai people, then is the Constitution being revoked and a new one being made in Thailand truly of a character with the same thing happening in, say, America? |
The bolded part...say what?
For some reason that question seems like a labyrinth. |
Sorry if I was unclear. In America, we view the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, so if the military were to simply overthrow the government and revoke the Constitution, we would feel a serious violation had occurred. But if the Thai people view the King as above their constitution, and the King blesses the revocation of their constitution, it seems to me that such a revocation occurring in Thailand is not exactly the same thing as if such a revocation occurred in America. |
As I have mentioned earlier, the greatness of Thai king is not simply 'viewed' as being above their constitution - it is engrained in the minds of Thai people from an early age via public school education (something I have seen firsthand when I worked there), much like the anti-Japan sentiment is slowly ingrained in the minds of Korean people from the time they enter kindergarten.
In that sense, it is not unlike what goes on in North Korea, or what went on in Soviet union - with masses being indoctrinated in worshiping/following the nation's leader without question. Lèse majesté helps this cause even further.
By the way, there are two reads you may find interesting - ones which help to shed some light on what goes on behind the scenes in Thailand. 'The king never smiles' and 'A coup for the rich'.
Last edited by maximmm on Thu May 29, 2014 4:57 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ttompatz
Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pornpimol Kanchanalak wrote: |
May 23, 2014 1:00 am
On Wednesday morning - the day after the Army Chief declared the martial law - Thailand was bombarded with criticism and warnings from overseas. The UN Secretary General, the US State Department, the European Union, etc, all decided to assume the role of big brother.
Meanwhile Western media swooped on Thailand like scavengers sensing a dying animal down below. They were full of opinions, yet devoid of the full facts and unbiased information.
The voice from overseas talked big ideals - that individuals' freedom must not be violated, and that the democratic process must not be tampered with. These notions are the Holy Grail of modern Western civilisation, something that tomb raiders like Laura Croft get lured in by and thrilled about.
It is true that Thailand is not an isolated island; we are part and parcel of the world community of nations. As such, the community has a legitimate reason to express its apprehensions over events in Thailand. However, while so doing, it must not try to conveniently insert itself into Thailand's troubled political equation. By choosing to remain oblivious to certain facts and the whole truth of why Thailand is where it is today, the world's condescending criticism is at best unfair and at worst downright wrong.
If facts are inconvenient to the world community, then it should have refrained from straying into territory with which it is unfamiliar, for the result of such meddling is counterproductive. In fact, its energy would have been better spent in trying to locate more than 200 kidnapped Nigerian girls and bringing the kidnappers to justice. After all, Thailand is not Iraq or Afghanistan, where national sovereignty was completely trampled down by the West in the name of counter-terrorism.
Article after article in major Western media outlets has failed to mention the massive abuse of power on the part of the government, its corruption of epic proportions, and the blood and tears of poor farmers who broke their backs working the soil only to see the cash owed to them for their crops go into offshore and local bank accounts of politicians and their cronies. They have failed to mention that it was the government's misplaced intransigence and hubris that brought out millions of honest taxpaying citizens into the streets, unable to tolerate the daylight robbery of national coffers that they had paid in to.
Western media have harshly criticised the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission, depicting them as thorns in the side of Thai democracy. They overlooked the string of illegal actions by the government that led to the verdicts. The falsification of documents by the office of the then-prime minister is never mentioned because foreign press never bothered to study the verdict thoroughly. Truth be told, the verdict and impeachment of Ms Yingluck and her Cabinet was as good and as fair as the US Congress's decision to impeach Nixon over the Watergate case. In fact, the illegal acts, the cover-up, the abuse of power and the kickback schemes perpetrated by Nixon and his people pale in comparison with what the Thai government and its head did here.
And Nixon deserves credit for resigning when confronted with the full disclosures of his legal and administrative failing. In Thailand, the government twisted and bent the laws to serve its whim. It was selective over which laws it would follow and which legal interpretations it used. It didn't think twice before choosing the low road and demonstrating to the country that the laws only apply to little people like us, not them. And despite all this, it continued to insist on its "legitimacy", even when it had none left.
The Western media has chosen to ignore the torrent of vile epithets delivered by community radios and local cable TV, paid for by the powers-that-be and poisoning the minds of villagers and city-slickers alike, encouraging them to hate without really questioning whether what they hear is true or not. These media outlets love mentioning that Thaksin Shinawatra-led parties have managed to win every election for the last decade, but show no interest in the dirty political machine that got them into power.
The foreign press loves to drag the so-called elite, the "Amart", and the Palace into the picture because it sounds "sexy" and offers the intrigue of a conspiracy. But if pressed about what evidence they have of such interference, if they were honest they would admit they had none. Their "evidence" comes merely from the words of biased academics, who are keen to communicate with them in their language of conspiracy.
As for the "Democracy" word that the Western world so loves to preach, the bad news is we never had the genuine article, only the "appearance" - a phantom democracy. We had elections, but they are not synonymous with democracy. The check-and balance mechanism in our political regime has been destroyed, or marginalised, and rendered toothless. That's why wholesale fraud and corruption have been allowed to prosper, and we the people have little or no say in it.
So when the world fails to fully grasp our terrible political situation brought on by bad government, when it ignores the killing of innocent and unarmed protesters that is met by absolute inaction on the part of that government, when it chooses not to see the large cache of war weapons at a resort owned by a former member of the government party and frequented by key red-shirt figures, and when it won't act on information that bombs and grenades are being moved across the border and into Bangkok, it thereby loses any right to preach to Thailand about the imposition of martial law.
It seems certain that martial law is simply Round One of this national "Thai Fight", and that things have only just begun. The military is now playing referee. Most people agree it has provided a necessary breather, no matter how short the space and what will happen next.
In our complex political scene, it is already extremely difficult to separate the facts from the fictions, the good from evil, the right from wrong. We are one big baffled family, and uninformed, prejudiced overbearing interference from outside can only make the confusion worse. The very real threat is that such meddling can be easily exploited to tip the level-playing field of our politics, thereby smashing any chance for us, no matter how slim, to find our own Holy Grail. |
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
maximmm
Joined: 01 Feb 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Arguing for monarchy or democracy or oligarchy kind of misses the point. Its like debating whether God is one or many. Most Hindus would tell you he is both, and that's not the most interesting thing about God. |
Ok...I'll ask.
What is the most interesting thing about God? |
No. I won't let you derail this thread. The point is that whether God is one or many does not approach what is significant about what God is or what he would mean to mankind. Likewise, the democracy v oligarchy v monarchy debate is a false one.
You're an avid atheist. Does it matter to you whether someone believes in the Greek pantheon or a Christian God? No, you demand whatever it is you demand. Likewise, the democracy v oligarchy v monarchy debate is a false one. |
Perhaps your analogy is false, and mostly just an inappropriately used opportunity to inject your simplistic world view.
|
I'm sorry. I'll stop acting so evangelical about my deeply and closely held Hindu beliefs.
I'm also sorry because I lied. I will allow you to derail this thread because you are annoying, you assert that I hold beliefs which I do not (I am simply well-educated), and this is an excellent occasion to mock and berate you.
| Quote: |
Your point was easy to understand.
Why bring your god into it?
|
Why not bring God or Hinduism into it? Simply because you have a hate-on for theology? Am I supposed to circumscribe my discussion based on your preferences? I'd simply tell you to go to hell, but I wouldn't want to oppress you with society's Judeo-Christian framework. Maybe I should dumb it down and American it up for you next time and do a sports analogy:
As we can see, monarchy v oligarchy v democracy is a false framework. Treating them as distinct would be like selecting three different players in the NBA draft, one for the best defensive abilities, one for the best free-throw percentage, and one for the best passing skills, when of course any good basketball player needs all three at once.
| Fox wrote: |
Kuros wrote:
Does it matter to you whether someone believes in the Greek pantheon or a Christian God?
It matters to me. Anyone who seriously believes in the Greek pantheon (as opposed to just screwing around) surely shares the mores of those deities, which means they're likely to kill me, strip my body of its valuables, and then ransom my corpse. By contrast, the Christian will just annoy me by asking me if I know Jesus died for me. |
Precisely my point. It would matter to you, because you are not some weird anti-theist fetishist who objects to even a scenario in which one is asked to entertain the existence of a God or gods, and would instead consider the ramifications of the specific dogma, tenets, philosophy, etc. The Dawkins atheist crowd just objects to any mention of any kind of diety whatsoever because they're obnoxious, even more obnoxious than the Christian who asks you if you knew Jesus died for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Arguing for monarchy or democracy or oligarchy kind of misses the point. Its like debating whether God is one or many. Most Hindus would tell you he is both, and that's not the most interesting thing about God. |
Ok...I'll ask.
What is the most interesting thing about God? |
No. I won't let you derail this thread. The point is that whether God is one or many does not approach what is significant about what God is or what he would mean to mankind. Likewise, the democracy v oligarchy v monarchy debate is a false one.
You're an avid atheist. Does it matter to you whether someone believes in the Greek pantheon or a Christian God? No, you demand whatever it is you demand. Likewise, the democracy v oligarchy v monarchy debate is a false one. |
Perhaps your analogy is false, and mostly just an inappropriately used opportunity to inject your simplistic world view.
|
I'm sorry. I'll stop acting so evangelical about my deeply and closely held Hindu beliefs.
I'm also sorry because I lied. I will allow you to derail this thread because you are annoying, you assert that I hold beliefs which I do not (I am simply well-educated), and this is an excellent occasion to mock and berate you.
| Quote: |
Your point was easy to understand.
Why bring your god into it?
|
Why not bring God or Hinduism into it? Simply because you have a hate-on for theology? Am I supposed to circumscribe my discussion based on your preferences? I'd simply tell you to go to hell, but I wouldn't want to oppress you with society's Judeo-Christian framework. Maybe I should dumb it down and American it up for you next time and do a sports analogy:
As we can see, monarchy v oligarchy v democracy is a false framework. Treating them as distinct would be like selecting three different players in the NBA draft, one for the best defensive abilities, one for the best free-throw percentage, and one for the best passing skills, when of course any good basketball player needs all three at once.
| Fox wrote: |
Kuros wrote:
Does it matter to you whether someone believes in the Greek pantheon or a Christian God?
It matters to me. Anyone who seriously believes in the Greek pantheon (as opposed to just screwing around) surely shares the mores of those deities, which means they're likely to kill me, strip my body of its valuables, and then ransom my corpse. By contrast, the Christian will just annoy me by asking me if I know Jesus died for me. |
Precisely my point. It would matter to you, because you are not some weird anti-theist fetishist who objects to even a scenario in which one is asked to entertain the existence of a God or gods, and would instead consider the ramifications of the specific dogma, tenets, philosophy, etc. The Dawkins atheist crowd just objects to any mention of any kind of diety whatsoever because they're obnoxious, even more obnoxious than the Christian who asks you if you knew Jesus died for you. |
I'm not derailing this thread, but you certainly are.
An entire hate filled post consisting of insults and religion.
Well done.
You sound like a childish coward, whining about being called a childish coward. Or more to the point, you sound like one brimming with religious petulance, inappropriately farting god(s) into a conversation, then feigning surprise that everyone does not pretend to enjoy or ignore the insulting behavior.
All this anger you're venting, just because you couldn't answer one simple question that you yourself posed.
Feel free to man-up and answer the question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
You sound like a childish coward, whining about being called a childish coward. Or more to the point, you sound like one brimming with religious petulance, inappropriately farting god(s) into a conversation, then feigning surprise that everyone does not pretend to enjoy or ignore the insulting behavior. |
I'm not the least bit religious, that's why I don't feel like answering the question what would be the most interesting question about God. I just know that whether he is one or many is rather immaterial. I hope that settles it for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
You sound like a childish coward, whining about being called a childish coward. Or more to the point, you sound like one brimming with religious petulance, inappropriately farting god(s) into a conversation, then feigning surprise that everyone does not pretend to enjoy or ignore the insulting behavior. |
I'm not the least bit religious, that's why I don't feel like answering the question what would be the most interesting question about God. I just know that whether he is one or many is rather immaterial. I hope that settles it for you. |
It doesn't settle anything.
But as I said before your little insult fest...carry on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
