Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s giving back the Nobel Prize speech

I have a strange, unbelievable dream as I never think that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi would never give-up her Noble Peace Prize even if she really understand and accept that she is not worthy of that Prize given to her just as a catalyst to accelerate or pressure the democratic change in Burma. But as this is a dream and is similar to one of her most famous speech, I just posted as a SATIRE.

(Her words in italics and mine normal fonts some are in the brackets and in brown colour in my blog.)

Following is the full text: Suu Kyi’s giving back of the Nobel Prize speech

Your Majesties, Your Royal Highness, Excellencies, Distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee and Dear Friends,

When the Nobel Committee (wrongly) awarded the Peace Prize to me they were recognizing that the oppressed and the isolated in Burma were also a part of the world, they were recognizing the oneness of humanity. (But) for me receiving the Nobel Peace Prize (does not)mean personally extending my concerns for democracy and human rights beyond national borders. The Nobel Peace Prize (failed to) open up a door in my heart.

Fires of suffering and strife are raging around the world. In my own country, hostilities have not ceased in the far north; to the west, communal violence resulting in arson and murder were taking place just several days before I started out on the journey that has brought me here today. News of atrocities in other reaches of the earth abound.

Reports of hunger, disease, displacement, joblessness, poverty, injustice, discrimination, prejudice, bigotry; these are our daily fare. Everywhere there are negative forces eating away at the foundations of peace. Everywhere can be found thoughtless dissipation of material and human resources that are necessary for the conservation of harmony and happiness in our world.

But I am not only scared to stand by the oppressed or tortured people but even telling the truth because my supporters are brainwashed and are highly charged with Ultra-Nationalistic spirit. Once I reveal the truth and defend the oppressed people, I would be abandoned and I am sure my NLD and I would suffer the heavy loss in the next election in 2015. Bama Military is very clever and had successfully set a trap. Sorry I cannot speak up nor do the right thing as I am eager to be a next President of Burma.

So please may you all kindly allow me to deliver my , “No Freedom from Fear speech”. May be you all could labled rightly as I am corrupt (Aung Sang Suu Kyi, 2012).

I am suffering from one variant of corruption: moga-gati, i.e. aberration due to ignorance and bhaya-gati: fear, stifle and slowly destroy all sense of right and wrong

It is not power that corrupts but fear.

Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it.

Most Burmese are familiar with the four a-gati, the four kinds of corruption.

Chanda-gati, corruption induced by desire, is deviation from the right path in pursuit of bribes or for the sake of those one loves. I wish to be a President and most of my followers are blinded with Nationalism.

Dosa-gati is taking the wrong path to spite those against whom one bears ill will, and

Moga-gati is aberration due to ignorance. I am also suffering this as intentionally pretending not to know the cause and history of the Rakhine conflict.

But perhaps the worst of the four is bhaya-gati, for not only does bhaya, fear, stifle and slowly destroy all sense of right and wrong, it so often lies at the root of the other three kinds of corruption. I have to admit that if I stand by the Human Rights and Moral Issues my people would be angry a dump me or the military generals would put me into detention again.

Just as chanda-gati, when not the result of sheer avarice, can be caused by fear of want or fear of losing the goodwill of those one loves, so fear of being surpassed, humiliated or injured (me) in some way can provide the impetus for ill will.

And it would be difficult (for me) to dispel ignorance unless there is freedom to pursue the truth unfettered by (my) fear.

With so close a relationship between fear and corruption it is little wonder that in any society where fear is rife, corruption in all forms becomes deeply entrenched (in me).

But it was more than the difficulties of eking out a barely acceptable standard of living that had eroded the patience of a traditionally good-natured, quiescent people – it was also the humiliation of a way of life disfigured by corruption and fear (in me).

The XXX (Muslims) were protesting not just against the death of their comrades but against the denial of their right to life by a totalitarian regime which deprived the present of meaningfulness and held out no hope for the future.

But their affluence offered them no genuine sense of security or fulfillment, and they could not but see that if they and their fellow citizens, regardless of economic status, were to achieve a worthwhile existence, an accountable administration was at least a necessary if not a sufficient condition. The people of Burma had wearied of a precarious state of passive apprehension where they were ‘as water in the cupped hands’ of the powers that be.

Emerald cool we may be_As water in cupped hands_But oh that we might be_As splinters of glass_In cupped hands.

Glass splinters, the smallest with its sharp, glinting power to defend itself against hands that try to crush, could be seen as a vivid symbol of the spark of courage that is an essential attribute of those who would free themselves from the grip of oppression.

Bogyoke Aung San exhorted the people to develop courage: ‘Don’t just depend on the courage and intrepidity of others. Each and every one of you must make sacrifices to become a hero possessed of courage and intrepidity. Then only shall we all be able to enjoy true freedom.’

The effort necessary to remain uncorrupted in an environment where fear is an integral part of everyday existence is not immediately apparent to those fortunate enough to live in states governed by the rule of law. Just laws do not merely prevent corruption by meting out impartial punishment to offenders. They also help to create a society in which people can fulfil the basic requirements necessary for the preservation of human dignity without recourse to corrupt practices.

The burden of upholding the principles of justice and common decency falls on the ordinary people. It is the cumulative effect on their sustained effort and steady endurance which will change a nation where reason and conscience are warped by fear into one where legal rules exist to promote man’s desire for harmony and justice while restraining the less desirable destructive traits in his nature.

When immense lethal weapons which are used by the powerful and the unprincipled to dominate the weak and the helpless, there is a compelling need for a closer relationship between politics and ethics at both the national and international levels, which I cannot do.

I cannot absolutely accept The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations proclaims that ‘every individual and every organ of society’ should strive to promote the basic rights and freedoms to which all human beings regardless of race, nationality or religion are entitled.

But as long as there are governments whose authority is founded on coercion rather than on the mandate of the people, and interest groups (like NLD headed by me) which place short-term profits above long-term peace and prosperity, concerted international action to protect and promote human rights will remain at best a partially realized struggle.

There will continue to be arenas of struggle where victims of oppression have to draw on their own inner resources to defend their inalienable rights as members of the human family.

The quintessential revolution is that of the spirit, born of an intellectual conviction of the need for change in those mental attitudes and values which shape the course of a nation’s development.

A revolution which aims merely at changing official policies and institutions with a view to an improvement in material conditions has little chance of genuine success.

Without a revolution of the spirit (e.g. DASSK), the forces which produced the iniquities of the old order would continue to be operative, posing a constant threat to the process of reform and regeneration.

It is no need to always call for freedom, democracy and human rights. I don’t believe to have a united determination to persevere in the struggle, to make sacrifices in the name of enduring truths, to resist the corrupting influences of desire, ill will, ignorance and fear (which I am having now).

Saints, it has been said, are the sinners who go on trying.

So free men (look I am just a lady and not totally free from the influences of Military Rulers) are the oppressed who go on trying and who in the process make themselves (not myself) fit to bear the responsibilities and to uphold the disciplines which will maintain a free society.

Among the basic freedoms to which men aspire that their lives might be full and uncramped, freedom from fear (I am now scared) stands out as both a means and an end.

A people who would build a nation in which strong, democratic institutions are firmly established as a guarantee against state-induced power (sorry, it could not apply for the Bengali Invaders) must first learn to liberate their own minds (but I cannot) from apathy and fear.

Always one to practice what he preached, Aung San himself constantly demonstrated courage (but I am not Aung San but his weak daughter only) not just the physical sort but the kind that enabled him to speak the truth (I still don’t know the cause of Riots even afterfive months), to stand by his word, (I am not going to stand by my word) to accept criticism (I and NLD would not accept criticism) , to admit his faults (I won’t admit my faults), to correct his mistakes (I am not correcting my mistakes), to respect the opposition, to parley with the enemy and to let people (but I dare not let the people) be the judge of his worthiness as a leader.

It is for such moral courage (I have NO MORAL COURAGE) that he will always be loved and respected in Burma – not merely as a warrior hero but as the inspiration and conscience of the nation. The words used by Jawaharlal Nehru to describe Mahatma Gandhi could well be applied to Aung San:

‘The essence of his teaching was fearlessness and truth, and action (my actions are different) allied to these, always keeping the welfare of the masses (for me not to offend Buddhist masses but Muslim masses need not deserve care) in view.’

Gandhi, that great apostle of non-violence, and Aung San, the founder of a national army, were very different personalities (from me! See because of that both of them were assassinated but I am still surviving), but as there is an inevitable sameness about the challenges of authoritarian rule anywhere at any time, so there is a similarity in the intrinsic qualities of those who rise up to meet the challenge. Nehru, who considered the instillation of courage in the people of India one of Gandhi’s greatest achievements, was a political modernist, but as he assessed the needs for a twentieth-century movement for independence, he found himself looking back to the philosophy of ancient India: ‘The greatest gift for an individual or a nation. .. was abhaya, fearlessness, not merely bodily courage but absence of fear from the mind (But I have an absence of courage in my mind).’

Fearlessness may be a gift but perhaps more precious is the courage acquired through endeavour, courage that comes from cultivating the habit of refusing to let fear dictate one’s actions (but I cannot), courage that could be described as ‘grace under pressure’ (for be the eloquent Silence under pressure) grace which is renewed repeatedly in the face of harsh, unremitting pressure.

Within a system which denies the existence of basic human rights, fear tends to be the order of the day. Fear of imprisonment, fear of torture, fear of death, fear of losing friends (Look…I have fear of losing Patriotic Bama and Buddhists friends), family, property or means of livelihood, fear of poverty, fear of isolation (me 2), fear of failure.

A most insidious form of fear is that which masquerades as common sense or even wisdom, condemning as foolish, reckless, insignificant or futile the small, daily acts of courage which help to preserve man’s self-respect and inherent human dignity (I am just a weak woman).

It is not easy for a people (me 2) conditioned by fear under the iron rule of the principle that might is right to free themselves from the enervating miasma of fear. Yet even under the most crushing state machinery courage rises up again and again, for fear is not the natural state of civilized man. (But I am afraid.)

The wellspring of courage and endurance in the face of unbridled power is generally a firm belief (I don’t know) in the sanctity of ethical principles combined with a historical sense (I don’t know the history of Rohingya) that despite all setbacks the condition of man is set on an ultimate course for both spiritual and material advancement.

It is his (not me) capacity for self-improvement and self-redemption which most distinguishes man from the mere brute like me.

At the root of human responsibility is the concept of perfection, the urge to achieve it, the intelligence (I don’t know the truth and the cause of conflict even after 5 months) to find a path towards it (I am lost),and the will to follow that path (I don’t even want to) if not to the end at least the distance needed to rise above individual limitations and environmental impediments.

It is man’s vision (not a lady’s vision) of a world fit for rational, civilized humanity which leads him (not me) to dare and to suffer to build societies free from want and fear.

Concepts such as truth, justice (no need Justice for Muslim Bengali invaders) and compassion (why?) cannot be dismissed as trite when these are often the only bulwarks which stand against ruthless power (ironically I want to poses after 2015 election).

So I hereby give back your worthless powerless Peace Prize so that I could become the First Civilian Women President of Myanmar. (FYI I just changed my mind to call our country, Myanmar)

Adapted from DASSK’s 2 speeches: A. AND  B  

Tags: , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to “Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s giving back the Nobel Prize speech”

  1. Md Junadi Says:

    She also requested this to you.


    correct the typos – spelling of word – satire

  2. shawfekar Says:

    It is not for her, it is only for phone mow.

Leave a Reply to shawfekar Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: