Bells of tolerance
Re: “‘Big Joke’ targets foreign lady who griped about bell ringing”, ( BP, Oct 6).
There is a minority of Thais who are calling for calm in the Wat Sai bell-ringing drama and those people, notably including Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and the Bangkok Post’s editorial pages editor Ploenpote Atthakor, should be commended.
The Post reported that our prime minister cautioned us “not to fan out the issue” and this is sage advice for two reasons. First, the complainant is a foreigner and second, Thailand is asking an awful lot of foreigners to tour, study, live or invest here.
Thailand sometimes does not understand that there is no such thing as “one Buddhism” when one contends with the costs and consequences of globalisation. All non-Thai branches of Buddhism have substantially different traditions and it’s not fair to expect foreigners to understand Thai traditions; nor is it fair to forbid them to ask “why?”
When the global community sees religious intolerance and draconian penalties in scenarios involving foreigners in Thailand, it substantially deters their interest in living or otherwise economically investing here.
One must understand that a lack of a carefully manicured ex-patriot pedigree has been a large contributor to Thailand’s dwindling ability to innovate and, as the country visibly starts to falter behind its neighbours, it becomes less likely for Thailand to escape the so-called middle-income trap unless we change some of our ways, but not necessarily change our traditions.
While I happen to believe that the bells should ring just as they always have, demon- ising a foreign national is a counterproductive response. In short, when a foreigner asks a legitimate question, even an angry or offensive question, if the answer we give is “because my God can beat up your God!” — then we’ve got a terribly incorrect answer.
Let us instead ring the bells of tolerance or, as Freddie Mercury so aptly put it back in 1982, las palabras de amor (Let me hear the words of love). JASON A JELLISON