Pridi Phanomyong and Puey Ungphakorn.

Dr. Pridi was taking part in the revolution that changed Thailand from the absolute monarchy to constitutional monarchy almost a century ago. He has founded Thammasat university as the first liberal university after the revolution, the very university I'm studying in right now. His lasting influence of liberal and social awareness mind-set in the university is the ultimate reason why I joined Thammasat university. It is truely sad that modern-day Thammasat university has lost its root to the founding principles and turned into just another Thai university with usual power politics and the dead of socially-concerned intellectual atmosphere.

He introduced me to the interest of economics, it is probably why I am very much a political economist regardless of my neoclassical training. His liberal attitude, concern for the society and the willingness to sacrifice truely captured my whole being. It is my hope that I could so something that will be towards his goal of building a better Thailand. He is a socialist with a love of market economy and great emphasis on the important of evolutionary society. He is a reason why I study Marx later on because all his work is heavily influenced by Marx and the idea of equal opportunity. His vision might be slightly utopean but it is very meaningful in term of how the society should help each other, how the state should provides critical services to the society in a non-discrimatory basis, how the market system can never be perfect.

Dr. Puey is a founder of my faculty of Economics. He is an ethical successor of Pridi in my view, they share very much the same social ideology although Puey is far more neoclassical and tends very much towards free market. His economic approach as a governor of Thai central bank is a very balance view, never really dominated by any economic doctrines, not Marx and not pure neoclassical. He took a very balance attitude, try to integrate everything for the practical and proper use of economics towards the well-being of the society. This trend of being very open-minded with great balance in search for a proper and practical solution has internalized into how I approach economics and other things in life.

They both influenced me highly in my view towards economics and society in general, especially he set a high ethical standard for being economists. They both practice what I called "active morality", i.e. to be able to think critically about what is right and what is wrong and actually do something for the sake of righteousness. Puey once said that one must not tolerent evil because no matter small it is, it will never turn into good. They are active moralists rather than those passive ones that think, speak but never do any thing about it. They both take a position to fight against corrupted political powers and other misconducts in the national level. Of course, they both ended up in excile until they perished from the face of the earth. Their legacy has taught me many most important things in living my life.

They have taught me the importance of having Active morality, that I must be out there to do the right thing possible, not simply talk about it. They have lead me to concluded that the worst people that caused the take-over of evil and corrupted things in the society is actually those good moral people who do nothing. This is because the good people are mainly passive moralist, always get away by saying "I would not downgrade myself to deal with those problematic evil issues. I've work out my paradox, mostly there are few bad people but why they are always in control at the highest power structure all the time.

The reason I came up with this is that because the good people just sit there and do nothing. The gradual increase of the evil in the society is never stop, when it caught some attention, it's generally too late. I'm in serious doubt of the mass public because of this, they are good people and they simply do nothing to prevent the gradual increase of the evil. That's why Thammasat university has declined , that why Thailand is being ruled by corrupted politicians. I'm frustrated by the mass public ability to act on their own as an combine force of different fully conscious individuals, I tends to believe that mass public can't do that on their own, they need leader to channel their force to the single fruitful direction. Mass public are there to support things that are good but not to execute the active morality itself. That's why Dr. Pridi and Dr. Puey were in excile until they died, the mass public don't do anything about it.

When they both died in frustration and loneliness, their souless bodies were sent to Bangkok for the recognition of their good deeds. The mass public do many things in honor of their good deeds, they've become public hero. I was very sad at the first year I've entered Thammasat univeristy, Dr. Peuy died in England and his body was sent back for grand honoraly ceremony. The university professors, students, politicians and the mass public voiced the greatest requiem of the death of national hero. Everyone seems to be talking about his good deeds and how sad he has gone. Under this superficial face of public normalcy, I was getting very angry at our leaders, both academics and politicians and the public themselves.

They did nothing when he was alive due to political problem and the lack of care, they simply celebrate the dealth of another person who was in the way against the evil in the society. The celebrate the end of long problem. Now he is no more danger to anything. He is dead. Both Dr. Puey and Dr. Pridi have faced the same unfortunate fate. They have secretly taught me one lessons, that one must be fully conscious of political situation and play it unnaively. Pridi onced said that when he has the power, he was naive. When he finally realized the complexity of the game, he is no longer having any power.

They taught me through logical implication that pure idealist position is very dangerous and that we must have a control of power if we wanted the change to take a sustainable long-run effect. In sum, they reminded me, with their unfortunate fate, that I must master the game of power politics without losing my active moral ideology. This lessons has become the center of my living, in order to make change the system, one must find one's way into the center of the system and destroy the old structure with its own power structure under one's own control and leads the mass public to support it.

(links for more informaion)