When I was
young, I used to fight with my siblings when I want something that they had. I ran
riot because I was innocent, and I didn't know what the reason is. However,
when I grew up, I realize that fighting is the way of uncivilized people, and
I’m not a savage who fights just only because of the infinity of desire.
According to
the BBC news article “Brazil Rio and Sao
Paulo teacher protests turn violent” reports that the peaceful protest
of Brazilian teachers, who ask government for better salary, has become violent after the violation of
black mask anonymous men, who led off the battle and many public ravages.
The teacher is an occupation which is counted to be the basis of country development, but it is also well known that this career gets an inappropriate income. In Thailand, too, the teacher gets just a minimum of salaries that may be lower than government policy.
When I read this article I think it makes sense that Brazilian teachers should protest because if they think they work hard, so their income should be suitable. If it is not, they should complain to the government to get more. Peaceful protest is acceptable, but what if nobody cares about a compromise bargaining. Here the violent comes and people run riot.
It is not
100% sure that a compromise can solve every problem, but how far should people
do to get something they want in a complex society. What we should do when our
problem seem to be negligible to others. What if violent can give a fast and
direct answer. __________
 |
| Black masked man who turned peaceful protest into violent. |
The teacher is an occupation which is counted to be the basis of country development, but it is also well known that this career gets an inappropriate income. In Thailand, too, the teacher gets just a minimum of salaries that may be lower than government policy.
When I read this article I think it makes sense that Brazilian teachers should protest because if they think they work hard, so their income should be suitable. If it is not, they should complain to the government to get more. Peaceful protest is acceptable, but what if nobody cares about a compromise bargaining. Here the violent comes and people run riot.
 |
| a lashings of people who support pay raises of Brazilian teachers |
Reference
Why should the government be paying teachers at all?
ReplyDeleteIf parents want their children educated, isn't it right for them to pay the teachers what they think the teachers are worth, with worth being determined by the value of the service provided?
And how should we assess the value of teachers? It seems to me that that must be based on how well they actually teach. What do the statistics on this tell us about the value of Thai teachers? Do they deserve respect and high salaries, or something else?
In most countries, education is an infrastructure which government provides to their citizens because government have to look after the well being of citizen and education should be included. Everyone must gets an equal right to access to an education system for some families which are poverty, so government should support what are the necessary things.
Deletea teacher career is worth because they have more knowledge in what they graduated and they teach students who have less knowledge than teacher then student become smarter because of teaching of a teacher.
In Thailand, just only teacher can teach then they get respect from students. You can see that there is teacher day on January 16, like other special day, Thai society pay respect to a teacher. I think how well they teach is important, but just they can enlighten a student I think it's fine, but doesn't mean it enough, and teacher is taught that they should have moral and ethics that mean they must improve themselves continuously, and the result can be shown in the student performances.
But what most surprises me is the repeated idea that the government is responsible for everything. This sounds very communist to me, and likely to the same problems that make communism a disastrous failure and also seriously unjust.
ReplyDeleteWhy do people think that every problem means that the government should start interfering in people's lives? What gives any government a morally just reason to interfere in the lives of citizens?
Might the problem be too much government control and interference? For example, since Thai farmers are so very poor after so many decades of government "help", shouldn't we start to think that the government "help" might actually be the problem keeping Thai farmers poor? And the same for Thai education - different Thai governments have been "solving" the education problems for decades: How successful has this been for education in Thailand?
I think if something has interfere the well being of people, government must response for that, and I don't think government should response to everything, they can be like observation or come to provide some help to make sure that current problem is not going to affects to bigger part then become a severe problem.
Deletefor example, crude oils leak in near the Samed island, Petroleum Institute of Thailand is response for this and same as the people in Thailand came to help together, but if situation seem like uncontrollable like a lot of sea animals died, lots of crude oils can't be rescue soon and it's going to disturb the ecosystem people can't then go out to buy a necessary things for live; next, government should participate.