On Nov 2, 1:30 pm, PuppyXpress <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Gaffar Peang-Meth <[email protected]> > Date: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:04 PM > Subject: Our children profit from our actions > To: > > *PACIFIC DAILY NEWS > *November 3, 2010 > > *Our children profit from our actions* > > By A. Gaffar Peang-Meth > > "People power" is not beyond reach in Cambodia. Skeptics misunderstand > people > power and equate it with bloody rebellion. Khmers are Buddhists -- gentle > and > placid, who don't rise against a ruthless dictatorship. >
I disagree with this notion that Cambodians are Buddhists, gentle and placid. Let us explore these notions. First, I believe that Cambodians are seasonal Buddhists who believe in benefitting from their belief. Once it gives them benefit, they claim that they are Buddhist. Then it it doesn't give them benefits, they destroy Buddhism. This is very true when we talk about Cambodians living in the KhmerRouge era. It is very impossible for them to kill their own people in their own country if they really believe in Buddha from their hearts. Obviously they are not. Now, people call Cambodians as gentle and placid. They have not shown us at all that they are any of those things. In contrary, they show us how vicious they have been for their own people in their own country. One doesn't really need to go far to see it. Read their writings here on this discussion group. > The Albert Einstein Institution, committed to the defense of freedom, says: > "Nonviolent action (also sometimes referred to as people power, political > defiance and nonviolent struggle) is a technique of action for applying > power in > a conflict by using symbolic protests, noncooperation and defiance, but not > physical violence." > > My nine years (1980-1989) in the Khmer resistance against Vietnam's military > invasion and occupation took me near death's door many times, but I never > believed we could defeat the Hanoi armies that brought the Americans to a > negotiations table earlier. But we did believe that an effective Khmer > resistance would bring Hanoi to the negotiations table. That, in fact, > happened. > > Except, the Khmer nationalists never prepared themselves for post-1991 Paris > Peace Accords. > > Adding to the detrimental lack of careful strategic planning with necessary > "next steps," they were trapped in denial, blaming, as many simply realigned > themselves for political positions. > > The game of "svar pa'at bai loeu mo'at po-pe" (monkey smears rice on a > goat's > mouth) continued until today: The monkey ate the farmer's rice and smeared > rice > on a goat's mouth so the goat would be blamed for eating the rice; the > farmer > didn't know better and took out his anger on the goat, forgetting that goats > don't eat rice. > > *Population has power > > *I stood before my introduction to political science classes for 13 years, > driving home the same point every semester, that a government's "right to > rule" > is based on the people putting it in power. > > In a democracy, an election is free, fair and secret. Having given the > government the right to rule, the people feel morally responsible to respect > it, > obey its laws and commands and, as such, they bestow upon it its legitimacy. > > Dr. Gene Sharp writes in "From Dictatorship to Democracy," that "Dictators > are > not in the business of allowing elections that could remove them from their > thrones." > > *Culture, belief > > *Culture and belief do matter. > > A culture that emphasizes obedience, loyalty and order produces citizens > different from a culture that promotes creativity, independence and > self-respect. > > Thus lambs and lions emerge. > > The lambs don't disturb the status quo -- societal norms demand resolute > obedience and unquestioned loyalty. The lions use creative ways to be > independent and free. > > President Abraham Lincoln's 1863 Gettysburg address declared that America's > representative democracy, a "government of the people, by the people, for > the > people shall not perish from the earth." > > A government of the people is one that comes from the people themselves, not > from the ruling class; officials come from the citizenry. A government of > the > people that comes from the people operates for the good of the people, not > for > the good of the ruling class. > > A government by the people is one in which the people are the ultimate > decision-makers. They send representatives to make their wishes known in > decision-making. But representatives can't change the U.S. Constitution, > only > "we, the people" can. > > A government for the people is one that does things for the good of the > people; > the only purpose of government is to make their lives better. > The world's peoples want basically the same thing: Food, clothes, a roof, > security, decent health, a level of contentment, an ability to meet their > basic > needs -- in peace and security. > > *Dictatorships > > *Ironically, the population and the society are two necessary sources of > dictators' political power. A democracy uses its political structure -- the > executive, the legislative and the judicial branches, with power to > regulate, > extract and distribute -- to ensure the people's well-being. > > A dictatorship uses its political structure, with the same regulatory, > extractive and distributive power, to ensure the people's obedience, > submission > and cooperation, so dictators can stay in power. > > With a culture of self-evident truths, the people fight when their equality > and > rights are compromised. But, in a culture that espouses leader-follower, > superior-inferior, patron-client, master-servant relationships, the people > obey, > submit and cooperate. > > *Deny power sources > * > Dictators' feet are not made of immovable clay. Dictators don't stay > powerful > always. Likewise, democracy and rights fighters don't have to remain weak > forever. > > Sharp reasons: If dictators stay in power because they succeed in extracting > the > people's obedience, submission and cooperation, by denying the dictators > their > sources of power, they become powerless. > > Dictators control state institutions. But institutions are made up of people > who > steer them. People of high principles and beliefs would find ways to steer > the > institutions -- including the feared courts and security police -- away from > tyranny. > > Sure, people are strongly politically and socially conditioned to obey and > submit. But why can what is conditioned not be unconditioned? Is there > anything > unchangeable? > > I wrote before that my refusal to submit to blind obedience landed me in hot > political waters. So? A saying goes, "If you can't stand the heat, get out > of > the kitchen." > > I don't pretend to have answers to everything; I don't. But people can learn > what benefits all; unlearn what's detrimental. We know what those things > are. > Start, we must. The time to start was yesterday. Cry not for missed > opportunities. We won't see the benefit of our actions. Our children and > their > children will! > > A. Gaffar Peang-Meth, Ph.D., is retired from the University of Guam. Write > him > at [email protected]. > > http://www.guampdn.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/201011030300/OPINIO... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cambodia Discussion (CAMDISC) - www.cambodia.org" group. This is an unmoderated forum. Please refrain from using foul language. Thank you for your understanding. Peace among us and in Cambodia. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/camdisc Learn more - http://www.cambodia.org
