Chauvinists aggravating problem in South

[webfact]

Chauvinists aggravating problem in South

 

 

The failure to reach an amicable solution to the dispute over some students wearing the veil points to an attitude problem

 

The controversy over elementary school students wearing the Islamic headscarf in a public school in the South that operates on land belonging to a Buddhist temple is far from over as authorities at the local level are unable to resolve the dispute.

 

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, during this week’s Cabinet meeting, raised the question why the dispute had not been settled. The dispute should not be so difficult to resolve if all sides just followed the rules and regulations, he said.

 

His simplistic solution suggests that he lacks a proper understanding of the nature of this dispute and the overall historical animosity between the Malay-speaking South and the Thai State.

 

Thailand’s Malay-speaking South has reeled for 14 years under insurgency violence that has so far claimed about 7,000 lives since January 2004.

 

The Thai Constitution permits Muslim students to wear the Islamic headscarf in a public school. But when 20 teachers walked out of the Anuban Pattani School on the first day of this semester after a small group of children showed up wearing the hijab, the Education Ministry got nervous and immediately changed the ministry’s regulation.

 

The new regulation gives the administrators of public schools situated on a temple ground the power to decide the dress code.

 

These 20 teachers and their nationalist backers see themselves as defenders of “kwam pen Thai” and have painted this school as one of their last cultural spaces that is truly “Thai”.

 

A similar logic is employed in other places, such as the halal kitchen at the regional hospital in Yala province where the vast majority of the patients are Muslims. The same Buddhists said they wanted a “normal” kitchen, or in this case a non-halal kitchen. 

 

The zero-sum mentality embraced by the Thai Buddhist nationalists stems from the need to show the local Muslims who is the real owner of this land and the dispute at the Anuban School in Pattani was their opportunity to demonstrate their political belief.

 

But there are other public schools that operate on temple grounds in the far South where the abbots and teachers have no problem with their students wearing hijab or Muslim boys wearing long pants instead of khaki shorts.

 

The teachers at the Anuban Pattani, however, seem to be cut from a different cloth; they demanded that the school stick with tradition and not permit Muslim students to wear the hijab.

 

They are among the people who see themselves as (Thai) “minority” living among a (Malay) majority in the South who refuse to embrace a national identity that makes all of us Thai.

 

It’s a way of punishing the local Malays for refusing to embrace Thainess in the same manner as they do. With the ban, these nationalists are reminding the Muslims that it is the Buddhists who rule this nation, not the Muslims. Some may wonder how Thailand came to this point. It is not hard to figure out; our leaders and policymakers never took the time to understand the difficulties in the State’s relations with minorities.

 

Indeed, building a nation wasn’t as easy as they thought. However, if they approach this kind of problem with an open mind, surely an acceptable solution satisfactory to all sides can be found.

 

Our government talks about pluralism but does not seem to do anything to support that intent. For now, pluralism is just a fancy slogan that our leaders toss around.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30352250

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-08-16

[Samui Bodoh]

"...The zero-sum mentality embraced by the Thai Buddhist nationalists stems from the need to show the local Muslims who is the real owner of this land and the dispute at the Anuban School in Pattani was their opportunity to demonstrate their political belief..."

 

An excellent paragraph above!

 

This is the same attitude that I often see at immigration; some low-level flunky wants to make the point that you are not Thai and they are, therefore they are superior and you should know your place.

 

There are some in the Thai government who believe that a lasting solution for the people in the South means that they should give up their language, religion and culture. Good luck with that! If the Thai government genuinely wants peace in the South (hmm... do they?), then there must be some allowance for local culture, beliefs and norms.

 

Arrogantly demanding that a people give up everything they believe will not work. Period.

 

[Lungstib]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

It’s a way of punishing the local Malays for refusing to embrace Thainess in the same manner as they do.

Something that any foreigner living here has discovered only these people expect to be treated equally, something the rest of us are denied.

[kannot]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

The same Buddhists said they wanted a “normal” kitchen, or in this case a non-halal kitchen. 

I agree  with them, Muslims  more  than happy  to bleat about Non Halal food wherever they are

[BuaBS]

What a pro muslim opinion article again from the Nation.

[mikebell]

Give a Muslim an inch and he'll take a mile.  Multiple wives are allowed so Muslims are out-breeding the original/native population.  Ghaddafi said there was no need to invade Europe it would be under Sharia law via the ballot box.

[connda]

On the flip side, if a non-Muslim girl/woman resides in a Muslim-majority country like Saudi Arabia, then they will be wearing a hijab in public spaces and to school.  And there would be no discussion or debate about it unless they are living in a foreign enclave; no media opinion pieces complaining about how unfair it is.

The most culturally and religiously aggressive, most autocratic, and the least politically correct societies, the least pluralistic will always win in the end. It's simply a matter of time.

[Krataiboy]

Who cares what a child wears to school. Would the teachers react in the same way to teaching Jewish children wearing the kippah or Sikhs in turbans?

 

It's not what's on your head but what's inside it which counts.

[ELVIS123456]

The post is biased and anti-Thai nationalist - this is the stuff media outlets are doing all over the western world.

This Is Thailand. The Thais make the rules. The reason there is so much violence and dischord in the South is because the Muslims refuse to accept the Thai rules, and openly fight them.

It is that simple. And it is the same simple truth everywhere. Muslims refuse to accept the rules of other cultures. 

 

Whilst 'inclusion' is a great idea, allowing Muslims to marry 9 year olds is something we must not ever allow in our countries.

If you accept that then the matter is where do you draw the line?

Personally I find both the Hijab and Khimar fine.

But I would ban the Niqab, Burka and Kimar in public places and buildings.

 

Meanwhile, rather than cause all the trouble, perhaps the Muslims involved can send their kids to a Muslim school, rather than demanding their 'rights in a Thai school where the children are expected to observe and follow Buddhist practices.  This is why they have Muslim only schools in the west, and western/Christian schools in Muslim countries. 

 

[Justgrazing]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

His simplistic solution suggests that he lacks a proper understanding of the nature of this dispute

Hmmm .. An appraisal that might be applied to most of whatever else he turns his hand to maybe ..

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

The post is biased and anti-Thai nationalist - this is the stuff media outlets are doing all over the western world.

This Is Thailand. The Thais make the rules. The reason there is so much violence and dischord in the South is because the Muslims refuse to accept the Thai rules, and openly fight them.

It is that simple. And it is the same simple truth everywhere. Muslims refuse to accept the rules of other cultures. 

 

Whilst 'inclusion' is a great idea, allowing Muslims to marry 9 year olds is something we must not ever allow in our countries.

If you accept that then the matter is where do you draw the line?

Personally I find both the Hijab and Khimar fine.

But I would ban the Niqab, Burka and Kimar in public places and buildings.

 

Meanwhile, rather than cause all the trouble, perhaps the Muslims involved can send their kids to a Muslim school, rather than demanding their 'rights in a Thai school where the children are expected to observe and follow Buddhist practices.  This is why they have Muslim only schools in the west, and western/Christian schools in Muslim countries. 

 

Not to bash you too much.. but even in many muslim countries (see Malaysia) they wont allow to marry a 9 year old.. So that point is totally invalid. So it should not even been brought up muslims themselves don't like it as a majority. 

[JAG]

27 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

The post is biased and anti-Thai nationalist - this is the stuff media outlets are doing all over the western world.

This Is Thailand. The Thais make the rules. The reason there is so much violence and dischord in the South is because the Muslims refuse to accept the Thai rules, and openly fight them.

It is that simple. And it is the same simple truth everywhere. Muslims refuse to accept the rules of other cultures. 

 

Whilst 'inclusion' is a great idea, allowing Muslims to marry 9 year olds is something we must not ever allow in our countries.

If you accept that then the matter is where do you draw the line?

Personally I find both the Hijab and Khimar fine.

But I would ban the Niqab, Burka and Kimar in public places and buildings.

 

Meanwhile, rather than cause all the trouble, perhaps the Muslims involved can send their kids to a Muslim school, rather than demanding their 'rights in a Thai school where the children are expected to observe and follow Buddhist practices.  This is why they have Muslim only schools in the west, and western/Christian schools in Muslim countries. 

 

Your post might have some traction were the Muslim population in the southern provinces relatively new immigrants, seeking to impose their religious and cultural practices on an indigenous Buddhist population. They're not. 

 

The southern provinces were not Thai or Buddhist . Thailand is trying to impose their religious and cultural practices on an indigenous Muslim population.

 

The daft thing is that the relatively moderate Muslim population of these provinces, if left to get on with their lives, would have probably (indeed they were) accepted Thai rule with relative equanimity. 

[ramrod711]

I'm an atheist, all religious rules are ridiculous as far as I'm concerned. Having said that, wear a scarf on your head, put your hat on backwards, I don't care, but don't hide your face. Not for your passport photo, drivers license photo, or any other identification you may use. Don't cover your face in a bank, or immigration or at the airport. It is a security issue not a religious one. I can only imagine what would happen if I donned a mask and entered a bank.

[Krataiboy]

23 hours ago, ELVIS123456 said:

The post is biased and anti-Thai nationalist - this is the stuff media outlets are doing all over the western world.

This Is Thailand. The Thais make the rules. The reason there is so much violence and dischord in the South is because the Muslims refuse to accept the Thai rules, and openly fight them.

It is that simple. And it is the same simple truth everywhere. Muslims refuse to accept the rules of other cultures. 

 

Whilst 'inclusion' is a great idea, allowing Muslims to marry 9 year olds is something we must not ever allow in our countries.

If you accept that then the matter is where do you draw the line?

Personally I find both the Hijab and Khimar fine.

But I would ban the Niqab, Burka and Kimar in public places and buildings.

 

Meanwhile, rather than cause all the trouble, perhaps the Muslims involved can send their kids to a Muslim school, rather than demanding their 'rights in a Thai school where the children are expected to observe and follow Buddhist practices.  This is why they have Muslim only schools in the west, and western/Christian schools in Muslim countries. 

 

Faith schools have no place in a modern, secular society. They are often an impediment to the integration, as experiences with Muslim faith schools in the UK has shown.

[robblok]

9 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Faith schools have no place in a modern, secular society. They are often an impediment to the integration, as experiences with Muslim faith schools in the UK has shown.

How about the countless Christian faith schools. They were quite normal back in the day in the Netherlands. I think they still are (havent really checked). All religion is based on brain washing from a young age. Not many adults who were raised without religion become religious later in life. 

[Krataiboy]

3 hours ago, robblok said:

How about the countless Christian faith schools. They were quite normal back in the day in the Netherlands. I think they still are (havent really checked). All religion is based on brain washing from a young age. Not many adults who were raised without religion become religious later in life. 

Same applies. Nothing wrong with state and private schools familiarising children with world's major religions. However, like you I am against the kind of indoctrination practised by faith schools, irrespective of the religion they are pushing. 

 

Religious brainwashing is a particular problem in the West (including The Netherlands), where mosques and madrassas funded by Islamist states like Saudi Arabia are passing on their divisive fundamentalist beliefs to future generations..