สำนักราชบัณฑิตยสภา

The Journal of the Royal Institute of Thailand Volume II - 2010 Towards A Culture of Peace in Thai Society 14 institutions. Its’fruition should be achieved by encouraging a basic trust in the system on hand which is a positive/active goal. This would go a long way towards providing a feeling of security, at the communal level, and giving a sense of having a stake in society, thus helping infuse a sense of social cohesion, in lieu of the compartmentalized sense of loyalty and compassion limited to a confined circle, which currently prevails with many in Thai society. Those who feel that they have a fair stake in the current environment and who appreciate life under the status quo, are more likely to resist the temptation to reject it and opt instead to defending the current way of life. People generally satisfied with their present circumstances, as well as that of the wider society commonly do not make rebels. Instead, these people can afford to enter a debate on issues in quite a relaxed frame of mind rather than being embittered or full of hatred. However currently in Thailand, such civilized debate without bias and political discourse and without prejudice seems in short supply, while short-tempered agitation and confrontation rule the day. Towards Non-Violence Violence erupts and conflict breaks out, not peace. This latter tends to be the culmination of a long process strewn with many difficulties and full of diversions. Without non-violence prevailing, though, there is no peace in society. Non-violence needs to be practised, a must for solidarity and cohesion. Thai society, as indeed any other, needs non-violence and peace to thrive. But what does this mantra really suggest? Is non-violence merely the absence of violence and is peace just the opposite of conflict or war? Rather abstract concepts, depicting a passive state of affairs without grades or levels of intensity, or should certain positive qualities be associated with these concepts that need to be present for generating or maintaining the wished-for positive state of affairs? These could as well include, enhancing the quality of life and promoting participation in the field of the wider public in the affairs of their communities and nation, as well as instilling positive values, an awareness of the need for social cohesion and solidarity amongst all citizens irrespective of their gender, age, ethnicity, religion, residence, occupation and income. What does society-wide non-violence – peace - really imply? Suppose, 98% would never resort to physical abuse, does this amount to a satisfactory state of non- violence and peace within society? However this would leave one million on the outside of this equation, perphaps too many. Must then not all abstain from violence