THAKSIN MUST LEARN TO ACCEPT THE BLAME

Few people take criticism well. Since it usually involves unfavourable
comment, the apportioning of blame for a fault, or passing judgment on our
ability, decisions or actions, even the most confident of us recoil at the
thought of being the subject of criticism. Indeed sages say that men rather
be ruined by praise than saved by criticism.

The value of criticism is priceless however. No open society can function
without it. At its best, it puts the supposed merits of a thing to the test
of intelligent discourse. At worse, it degenerates into little more than
exchanges of verbal abuse. But the true value of criticism in a democracy is
that it ensures a healthy society. Criticism asks those we put in power what
they propose to do with our lives. It lends validity to the democratic
process.

The right to criticise cannot be constrained if a system's checks and
balances are to work. Public figures, especially elected politicians, cannot
be beyond criticism. Hence Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's increasing
irritability with his critics is cause for great concern.

Mr Thaksin is well-known for his low tolerance of criticism, indeed any type
of opposition to his policies, and flares up and lashes out at his critics
and reporters all too frequently. Two recent examples were his outbursts
against a radio station which aired a recording of Purachai Piumsombun
criticising the prime minister for transferring him from the post of justice
minister; and his vicious attack on the human rights commissioner Pradit
Charoenthaithawee for raising concerns with the United Nations Human Rights
Commission about the high death toll in the government's war on drugs.
Though Mr Thaksin has denied any involvement, the army this week closed the
radio station in question for a day. He also is refusing to talk to the
Government House press corps after he was angered by questions about alleged
human rights violations and has demanded that reporters submit questions
through official channels.

Mr Thaksin accuses his critics of failing to see the big picture and how his
policies deal with national problems and are transforming the country in a
vibrant way. That may be so. He deserves credit for his imaginative policies
to tackle everything from national debt to poverty alleviation. But he must
not dismiss the concerns of his critics as irrelevant. If the devil is in
the detail, the supposedly small pictures that engross so many of us could
be the undoing of his grand scheme.

Just look at human rights. They are the basis of all civilised nations.
Without a healthy respect for these rights, even those of criminals,
barbarity will take hold. Turning a blind eye to officials taking the law
into their own hands will only blinker the rest of society. A nation's
leader is a powerful example to the rest of the people. If he tells them to
focus on the results rather than the way the drug war is being fought,
society will learn to solve problems only through violence.

If the prime minister rejects criticism and his lackeys punish those who
dare raise doubts, who will risk raising the alarm even if things look to be
going disastrously wrong? Without openness there can be no honest feedback
by which to measure policies. The big picture will very likely become more
and more distorted.

Mr Thaksin would be well-advised to attend some anger management classes,
and perhaps a few sessions of public sensitivity training. Then perhaps he
would be able to focus on the justification of individual criticisms rather
than simply reject them in an emotional outburst. Also, the most important
thing he can learn as an elected prime minister is, as another sage said,
democracy is simply the process by which people choose the man who will get
the blame.