Comments

  1. […] story — and images — from New Mandala (which, by the way, is an insightful blog about Southeast Asia): The Vientiane Scooter Club […]

  2. Newley says:

    This is SO awesome. Great story, and great pics.

  3. Chris Fry says:

    Whether there is evidence or not (and there doesn’t appear to be), one suspects, that whatever the rhetoric from the hotter heads,from the point of enlightened self interest the coup leaders would understand the terrible danger a lese majeste charge would pose to the Chakri dynasty if not the present incumbent.The international scrutiny of an absurd and anachronistic mechanism being deployed on a trunped up basis against a popularly elected if flawed PM would not be only corrosive of justice but also reputations

  4. Srithanonchai says:

    Well, the original accusation of (actions close to) lese majeste seem to have been reduced to impoliteness. In fact, I was rather surprised by what appears to be a downgrading of the charge by Sonthi himself.

  5. Pig Latin says:

    Ahh I like this a lot.

    Warren, where do I join the club?!!

  6. patiwat says:

    Much of those “signs” were manufactured by the yellow shirts. Even Thaksin-hater number one (Saprang) admits that there isn’t nearly enough evidence to charge Thaksin of lese majeste.

  7. vw_laos says:

    many ppl in vientien wanna do this club but get permission is very difficult.

  8. NoeL says:

    Vespa So Ctue.. Wanna go with Vespa caravan…

  9. ter laogirl says:

    wow…..it verry nice n cool page ….lolzz i like this so much ……

  10. Srithanonchai says:

    If we move away from the concept of “culture” (as the structure of talk amongst people) to motivational factors that might lead voters to their “choices,” we probably will encounter motivational mixes that might include factors such as (just a preliminary list) the knowledge of compulsory voting (importance of “no vote” votes); campaigning by the candidates; various kinds of social ties (being a family member, a relative, a friend, a client, a follower, an employee, a phuak member); trust in the superior knowledge of respected position holders; the baramee of an important local figure; intimidation; social pressure in the polling station; patronage; the work of hua khanaen; vote buying; the availability of local political party structures and activities; preferences concerning political parties (be they centered on party ideology, a charismatic leader, or government policies that benefited the voters); or political marketing and control of the mass media.

  11. Johpa says:

    He was even able to address some comments to the Karen present in their own language, a smart move in a region where linguistic word play is an exceptionally popular pastime.

    During my years of living in the rural north, I too noticed the rather high degree of linguistic awareness of the locals, such as their noting and actually reveling in the small linguistic differences that exist between the spoken Kham Muang (Northern Thai) of different districts, not to mention the more significant differences between say more distant dialects such as the local language spoken down in rural Lamphun. I have little experience in other regions of Thailand, but up north small nuances in spoken language are a big part of what constitutes fellow members of baan haw from others and knowing a few choice phrases in the local minority’s language where such populations exist also plays a key part in local identification.

  12. Srithanonchai says:

    Localism (introductory statement): All right — “localism” is one theme of political culture (culture here understood, following Luhmann, as a collection of themes to be used in communication), but there are other themes in this collection as well that might in one way or another contribute to the final voting decision.

    It is not only that social life is too complex to be limited to only one theme. More important probably is that humans operate on meaning. Maybe, a look into the chapter “Meaning” in “Social Systems” (Niklas Luhmann, Stanford 1995) can help clarifying some conceptual issues.

  13. Pig Latin says:

    I never said you attacked Andrew, I said you found what has been written, personal.

    I did not say that you specifically have denied ‘someones’ self-determination. This isn’t semantics. You do allude to denying localism and in essence, (for me at least) denial of a communal determination.

    In East Germany, one in six were stazi representatives, maybe Bangkok SAR could try one in three, and maybe you can push for the country-side to have one in four.. Who knows what those crazy locals might think?!

    Funnily enough, I wear a yellow t-shirt today!

  14. Srithanonchai says:

    Tosakan: Merkel is a GERMAN, her position is national-level Chancellor, and only a small fraction of voters resides in East Germany.

    You won’t need to go to Suphanburi or Songkhla, because we already have substantial work on the politics in these two provinces. This also applies to Chachoengsao, Pattani and Narathiwat (both under construction), Ayutthaya, and partly Phetchabun. However, you are most welcome (I really mean it!) to chose a province that suits you. But, please, it is not a simple as going there on a day trip. You would have to spend a few months there, and do some hard work (also in preparing your research). Then, you might be able to make a contribution to our attempt to aggregate data in this field.

    I previously have tried to point out to you that social science research is a piecemeal process, and though one might have some ideals about how one could do it, we also need to consider research reality (availability of qualified researchers, funding, election phenomena, etc.). You should not to see Andrew’s work in isolation, but rather in the context of results reported about in other works. And since you are inclined easily to assign work to others, may I take this occasion to ask you–not “to do the maths”– but to do the reading, that is creating the appropriate scholarly context for your evaluation?

    All this does not mean that I think Andrew’s work is exemplary, or even helpful. I don’t have any opinion on it so far, because I need to see the entire piece to know whether it is a good contribution–however limited in scope–or not. This includes in which way he contextualizes his work by reference to existing works.

  15. Tosakan says:

    Andrew-

    My criticism has nothing to do with liking or not liking your “research.”

    Your research doesn’t prove anything. That is my point. How can I like or dislike something you haven’t proven?

    You are guessing what local people want in Baan Tiem with anecdotal evidence that you have collected, but that proves nothing in terms of electoral behaviors or trends for the rural population of Thailand. A couple people in one village does not make the opinion of one village, and one village does not make a whole country.

    You have not proved that there is any such thing as a rural constitution, and you have not proved that localism exists. Therefore, how can you make a conclusion that these things have an impact on electoral results in the rural population or in Thailand one way or the other? On top of that, you don’t think empirical evidence is important to this study at all.

    Was your focus group or sample of villagers chosen scientifically?

    You specifically asked for people to comment on your “research.” If you only want people to agree with everything you say, then next time you should put that in your post.

    Of course, there will be many here who will jump down my throat and take your side because they have a “feeling” that what you say is true. But that doesn’t change the fact that neither you or them have proven anything of significance with scientific evidence.

    If you don’t think the science part of being a social scientist is not important, then just say so and I will leave you alone.

    Pig Latin-

    You have made two inferences about me that have no basis in reality.

    1. I have never denied anyone’s self-determination and I challenge you to find where I have done so.

    2. I have never attacked Andrew personally. He asked for comments. I gave them. If he doesn’t want comments, then he shouldn’t have a blog entry where he specifically asks for comments.

  16. Pig Latin says:

    Tosakan, would you deny a peoples self-determination? Irrespective of whether or not you would, you have clearly taken this as an attack on your person! Are you from the SAR of Bangkok!?

    Thankyou Andrew, this selection from your work has been most informative.

  17. nganadeeleg says:

    I appreciate the ‘insights into subtlety’ provided by Andrew’s local studies.

    Rural voters make up a large proprtion of the Thai electorate, so finding out how they make their voting decicions is important (as Thaksin & TRT obviously realised)

    Sorry if I derailed your topic to some extent (I will stay clear of your new thread), but the point I was trying to make is that we get the politicians we deserve.

    Voting based on self interest is not unique to rural thai’s, I just happen to think if the electorate was more discerning we would get a better quality of politicians.

  18. Tosakan, you might not like this sort of research. That’s fine. But it would be good to read it properly. In the case I talk about it was the unsuccessful opposition candidate that was regarded as the most local. One of the benefits of local studies is that they can provide some insights into subtlety. Media watch is useful, but not all useful knowledge comes from the media.

  19. 21Jan says:

    I was really stupid, Andrew. Given the reputation the rural voters have for the middle-class it was of course your aim to show the similarities with general voting behaviour.

  20. Tosakan says:

    I still don’t get the point of any of this.

    What does it prove?

    I don’t see the difference between this paper and me walking outside my home right now and asking my neighbors who they vote for and why. What realistic conclusion could I make if I talked to my neighbors about their political habits?

    And what if I took a bus to Suphanburi or Thonburi or Prachinburi or Songkla and just asked random people about their voting habits?

    I could make up anything from the anecdotes I received and call it a theory.

    I could go to Barharn’s stronghold in Suphanburi and make the same conclusions or maybe not.

    I could call it rural constitution or patronage politics or whatever.

    Plus, what happens in a local constituency says nothing about national trends.

    I’m not trying to be contentious.

    What does the reader get from the conclusion that “Thais in Baan Tiam prefer local candidates more than folks from outside their district”?

    Also, it is not the same all over the world.

    In the US, politicians move all over the country and represent places where they are not originally from.

    Hillary Clinton is not from New York.

    In Australia, I’m sure Australians move around and represent areas that they are not originally from.

    In the UK, there is a long tradition of MPs representing districts other than their original home districts

    George Galloway is an MP I can think of right off the top of my head.

    Srithanichai-And what about Merkel? She is from East Germany, yet doesn’t she get most of her support from the West, at least on the national level?