The Ugly

In terms of my analysis, I want to draw your attention back to the themes of my global seminar: Addiction, Power, and Buddhism.

How does begging relate to all three areas?

Let’s begin this analysis with Addiction. How does Addiction play a role in begging?

Addiction can be seen in three parts: 1) from the mafia perspective, 2) parents perspective, and 3) the beggar’s perspective.

Actually, let me be a bit clearer. Addiction is seen indirectly in begging when it pertains to the gang organizations. Although it’s fair to say that gangsters are also addicted to the substances that they market, in referencing the movie American Gangster as well as possibly Khun Sa (I say possibly because I’m not 100% sure that I’m recalling it correctly, but Khun Sa, although becoming a drug dealer and marketer himself, he did not become addicted to the narcotics he sold), the higher ranking gangsters were not addicted to the drugs themselves. However, it’s noted that it’s only my assumption, and that those gangsters may as well have been addicted.

However, continuing on!

The gang organizations profit from making other people addicted. That is, they make populations of people (typically working class to poor families) addicted to the narcotics they sold. They do so especially by setting up situations that target individual and societal vulnerabilities. One of the addicts that we spoke to at the Drug  Rehabilitation Center mentioned that the drug Yaba was so easy to obtain that all she had to do was walk a block down the street. In addition, neither she nor her friends knew of the negative effects of Yaba. No one told her – it’s like us and Advil (common); she even took Yaba during her pregnancy terms and still insist that Yaba had no effect on her children albeit having ingested Yaba daily.

How does a gang organization promote addiction then? They create hotspots, a region in which to conduct their business. They take advantage of individuals as well as families that are in need of help. They use under-handed techniques, threats, and violence to promote their business. Yaba would be introduced to these populations through various means. An example would be business owners supplying Yaba and then forcing the workers to purchase the Yaba to continue their employment. Another example pertains to spreading it socially – embellishing Yaba to be a “hip” substance. Another quote by the same addict at Drug Rehabilitation Center supports this comment: she mentions how her addiction to Yaba was a result of social events – that is she took Yaba because of her friends.

What I’m trying to say here is once again, the gang organizations elicit addiction through both direct and indirect means. As it pertains to the elderly and children beggars, the gangsters can very well take advantage of vulnerable populations such as those beggars quite easily. In addition to the violence enacted onto the beggars by the gangster, there is also the possibility that these beggars are in that situation due to their addiction with narcotics as well. However, sometimes it’s difficult to tell what came first: their addiction or the violence. I always give the benefit of the doubt to the individuals and believe that the violence came first. The gang organizations solicit addiction, and due to the very nature of addiction, the cycle repeats itself.

I’m not sure what to say about the parent’s perspective to be honest. Those who rent/sell their children off are despicable (Noting that this perspective is from those who rent/sell their children and not those who have had their children kidnapped). Again, I don’t know their family situation – it could be that they themselves had an ethical reason to do so (?). An example of this could pertain to their family not being able to support the child. I mean it isn’t ethical, but it’s certainly something the parents thought would have been the best for themselves. However, seriously? Selling your children to slavery and labor is messed up – it’s the opposite version of letting your children becoming a monk because you couldn’t support them – come on… However, we can also pin this on the gang organizations as well, such as the parents were so indebted to the gangsters that to spare their lives, they had to give up their children (sounds like a good movie plot right?). Or, as it pertains to addiction, the parents were addicted to substances and sold their children to obtain more narcotics. This last theory reflects addiction quite well in my opinion. Your judgment becomes impaired, your life spirals down, and the only thing you could think of is when and how you can satiate your addiction and hit another one up.

I’ve mentioned the beggar’s perspective by accident when talking about the gangsters. Therefore, I’ll do a brief reiteration: these beggars are in this situation (constantly on the streets begging) because this is the only way they can earn enough to satiate their addiction. They cannot get jobs anywhere else – not that they know how to. This is truer of the elderly beggars than children beggars, however with how overpowering an addiction seems to be, I won’t be quite as shocked if children were susceptible to this scenario as well.

Overall, we spoke about positive valence as well as negative ones. Buddha’s Brain mentioned the carrot and the stick. How do these terms correspond with addiction? We see addiction change brain chemistry; we see addiction as a relatively new conflict that bypasses our currently evolved defense mechanisms. That is, the narcotics these days are as addicting as they are toxic. Although we tend to avoid toxic substances (stick), if they change our body chemistry and elicit a positive valence (carrot: including perceptions and actual experience), then addiction becomes a hard foe to combat. Addiction itself becomes a weapon, used by individuals against other individuals.

The next part of this analysis concerns Buddhism. I don’t have much to say about Buddhism because I have trouble finding relations that I can explain. However, I hope the explanation I do have makes sense!

One of the things I wanted to address using Buddhism is that begging shouldn’t always be viewed in bad connotations. One form of begging that is a culturally accepted norm/practice in Thailand seems to be Alms Giving, which is done by Buddhist monk each morning. In return for receiving food from the townsfolk, the monks will bless the people with a prayer. This form of begging seems to be so normative that most people treat it as a duty – a duty to feed the monks. In addition, some people have turned it into a business. For example, at the place where we students saw Alms Giving in action, there were stands with sellers selling items to give to the monks. You may interpret this however you want, but I find this kind of ironic – that people can make a business out of almost everything as long as there is a demand.

Now really, how does Buddhism relate to begging? Buddhism promotes equanimity as well as empathy for every individual. That is, Buddhism teaches those who follow it to have compassion for each other – those that too much as well as those that do not have enough. This could be one of many explanations as to why begging is still so prominent. This is an aspect that gang organizations could be targeting as well. The gangsters understand Buddhism’s compassion – therefore, to elicit more of this compassion, the gangsters organize situations in which compassion could be given. I want to reiterate the question: “Are you actually helping, or are you hindering?” If compassion is given and justified, then compassion will continue. However, I just imagine how if compassion is given and wasn’t justified (that someone gave money only to find out that the money isn’t going to where they had originally thought), then what happens to that compassion? This reminds me of the conversation that our professor had with us on the train, in which he proposed: “How does Buddhism relate with Addiction? Can it coexist?” or something along those lines. Is Buddhism then really detrimental to the begging plea?  I argue that it’s not, but some people can argue that it is. The reason being is that Buddhism doesn’t only elicit compassion. The faith in Buddhism and the practices also play a role in addiction. Buddhism elicits morals and values that counteract the violence of gang organizations, and the ill-will that narcotics has on each individual. Addiction is part of human nature; it’s a (biological) mechanism that influences each individual. The reason addiction is so prominent is once again, it is so relatively new. This share similarities with Buddhism as Buddhism itself is “relatively” new as well. To clarify, since the creation of Buddhism (even before that, as the practices of Buddhism may have been practiced earlier), Buddhism has been one of the sources that nullify forms of addiction. The implication here is that narcotics have evolved as well to be more addicting, more toxic, and more available. This is why Buddhism is coexisting with addiction – it tries continually to counteract it, but it’s like going against the flow of the river (evolved biological mechanisms).

Does Buddhism succeed? I’m sure it does, as well as fail. It’s a case by case analysis because individuals are all unique in how they respond to addiction as well as Buddhism practices. What I can say for sure is that there is some connection between one of the Buddhism practice, meditation, and the quelling of addiction. Meditation promotes self-awareness of the present, that is, meditation promotes mindfulness. I’ve heard that monks, who have meditated for years are able to even control their metabolism. This hints at the theory that through obtaining mindfulness, one is able to change their body chemistry as well. This also relates back to Buddha’s brain in how it mentions that positive as well as negative thoughts can even shape the brain. Collecting together these fragments of ideas, I argue that meditation can help addiction not through direct physical means, but by encouraging the addict to realize their addiction, quell their withdrawal symptoms, and finally satiate their fixation.

The last part of my analysis concerns the topic of Power. How Power structures influence the state of Beggars. I have already mentioned some, such as the lack of retirement programs available to aid the elderly, as well as the regulations around the borders of Thailand. In addition, power structures that differ from the government are found in the gang organizations that conflict with them.

However, how does Power really come into effect when it comes to Beggars?

We can look at how beggars become beggars. Could the social structure of Thailand be responsible for the constant begging by the elderly and children? I don’t have the answer to that – I wish I did, as in I wish I was more involved and understood politics more. However, if you can recall what I typed about in my first blog post, I argue that there is some aspect of hegemony present that results in a business made up of a vulnerable population; that how the elite and those with money (thus power) act in a sense contribute to the poverty population. I see a social hierarchy similar to ones in the United States, especially in Bangkok.

Is Thailand also structured so that the elites have all the say in the system – even within the government? I understand that Thailand has a King and Queen, however, like with the Queen of England, their true political power is pretty much nothing. I argue that Thailand is also structured with elites. My reasoning is because of how fast it is globalizing. The connection here is that, for Thailand to globalize so quickly, there has to be people in high places that want profit and success. Yet to obtain that profit and success, many people would have to be trampled on. This is how I see Power. I see Power as a means of strength and control, be it over other individuals, environment, or the government system itself. I see individuals abusing such power, as well as supporting power in other aspects (either assisting gang organizations, or enacting programs that are detrimental to society and its civilians).

However, not all of it is oppression, or negative. Power can also be utilized in terms of good (corny, but bear with me). For example, Thailand now, in an effort to stop the growth and rampage of the gang organizations are requiring beggar badges (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beggars_Badges; http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/southeastasia/view/385961/1/.html). What these badges do is that they have legitimate beggars (see above) register with the Thai government to receive permits to beg. According to the Channelnewasia.com, nearly 80% of Thai people give money to beggars. In doing so, the Thai government hopes to deter and crack down on criminal rings that exploit beggars. This is mainly for the elderly it seems, and that eligibility might be more subjective than planned. However, with this beggar badge, those approved would be allowed to beg at certain locations during a certain time of day. This emphasizes still, Thailand’s unhappiness with beggars.

As for the children beggars, Thailand does have some regulations in effect that can counteract further exploitation. One prime example is that Thailand provides free schooling for children under age 12. Furthermore, Thailand further supports monk schools for children whose parents cannot support them beyond age 12. Therefore, with this knowledge in mind, one can identify (easier), which children are subjected to a life of begging. For more travelers’ knowledge, in case you yourself would like to venture throughout Thailand as well is that if you do encounter a child begging on the street, take notice of their appearance. If they look under age 12, are tanner than most of the individuals around them, and are dressed even dirtier than the setting calls for, then they might be child beggars under the control of gang organizations!

Therefore, as you can see Power can be utilized in two ways: for good or misused for evil (own personal gains). This is where I’ll be concluding my blog. In short, the state of begging in Thailand nowadays (in the 21^st century) is progressively better than the past. It’s not because of gangs and gang organization lacking in their duties to elicit terror and violence, but because of the increased supervision by the Thai government over matters such as begging. We still see begging, and we’ll probably continue to see begging years and years into the future. However, begging has evolved because individuals and societies also have evolved.

Nonetheless, to end this blog, I want to reiterate the concepts of Addiction, Power, and Buddhism. These themes, I argue, are all connected to the state of Beggars either directly (as seen in Addiction and Buddhism), to indirectly (through Power). These themes also seem to be coexisting through many sources, and if I dare say, are in a cycle. We see that Power plays a role in Addiction and that Addiction plays a role in Buddhism and Power. Therefore, what does it mean to be a beggar? What does it mean to beg?

It means to be influenced by psycho – social – and biological mechanisms and phenomenon directly or indirectly.