Dialogue with Mr. Min Shwe
——————————
Understanding the Rohingya People: Similarities and differences between Bengalis and the Rohingya people of Arakan (part 1)
Mr. Shaw,
Historically speaking, due to its location on a racial faultline, Arakan has remained an epicentre of refugee production in the region until our present time. In understanding this phenomena, for historians in particular, I think several dates are significant in the history of Arakan, beginning from 957 AD, through the 1430, 1660, 1666, 1784,1824 and 1982. In consideration of the above premise, when I say most of the Rohingyas have historically similar background as was with people of Bengal until the 11th century, I mean several things:
(1) Like in Arakan, Bengal was first Hindu then became Mohayana buddhist. In Arakan, the Mohanuni statue was by the Mohayana buddhists of the Chandra time and racially people were 100% of Indo-Aryan stock.”The coins of Wasali had the image of Siva engraved on it.” Arakan was known to Indian missionaries as the “Kalamukha” (land of the dark-skinned people). “The second phase of Indianization of Arakan occurred between the 4th and the 6th century AD, by which time the colonists had established their kingdom, and named their capital Vaishali.” By this time Arakan became a Mohayana buddhist kingdom. As a port city, Vaishali also developed some pockets of Muslim settlements from Arab and Persian businessman who on their way to the East settled in Arakan and Chittagong. In the process the name Arakandesa, Arakan, Arabic and Desha is Sanskrit became the name of the kingdom. This was Arakan until the middle of the 10th century.What was the language of these people? The language of the Chandras was proto-Chittagonian: Sanskrit, Pali, and Arabic mixed. See the ”The Anand Chandra Inscription, which contains 65 verses (71 and a half lines) and now sited at the Shitthaung pagoda, provides some information about these early rulers. .. This 11-foot high monolith, unique in entire Burma, has three of its four faces inscribed in a Nagari script, which is closely allied to those of Bengali and north-eastern India. There is no trace Burmese or Arakani script on it.
(2) Something happened, historians records in 957 AD when Tibeto-Burman people in large numbers entered Arakan and took its cntrol over defeating the Chandra Mohayanas and imposing Hinayana buddhism, the latter adapted from the Mons in the south who in their turn took it from Sri Lanka. Similar changes didn’t happen in Bengal. In Bengal, most Mohayana Buddhist were converted to Islam by Sufi mystics. With the fall of Arakan to the look alike Tibeto-Burmans, the Chandra Indians were either pushed to the north of Arakan or some even left Arakan for Bengal. Around this time, the defeated Chandra Royal family was found to settle in Chittagong proper. The Dev Pahar, named after Dev Chandra was the site of the new buddhist kingdom. In North Arakan, mostly Chandra Hindus (lower casts also known as the Rakkhas) slowly adapted Islam converted by the already existing Muslims of Arakan and Persian descent and most buddhist elites joined the Tibeto-Burnan Theraveda group or a defeated small number of buddhist adopted Islam. Arakan became on one hand Theraveda buddhist with largely Tibeto Burman stock, later came to be known as the “Mog/ Mug”. Moghs settled in the south and Muslims, Hindus and the other kulas Indian look alike people settled in the north. Durinng the Chandra times and to its end in Arakan, we see the traces of Arabic names such as Rambree, Sufi sites on Myu Mountain tops, and Badre Patis in the Northern part of Arakan. From the 11th century, clearly with the Tibeto-Burman rule, Arakan now began to look east only until the year 1430. (Continues to part 2).
Thanks for your interesting post and the reporting from Kompong Thom.
As I read through the posting however… and encounter phrases such as these:
—–
“…often an implicit assumption, made by some analysts of Cambodia…”
“It is common within development and research circles…”
“…commonly held assumptions …”
“Within the context of Cambodia where NGOs tend to see themselves as the sole legitimate actors who can represent village interests…”
“NGO’s are largely coerced – whether they actually believe in it or not – to follow the comfortable liberal conception of society…”
“The typical NGO solution…”
“…the majority of NGOs…”
“The point of all this is not to entirely dismiss NGO efforts…”
“Much of the development industry…”
“Yet few people seem to consider it problematic when NGOs and donors…”
“A similar lack of balance is often a characteristic…”
“…massive number of NGOs which…”
——
… I’m left wondering how you arrived at such an assessment of the situation with donor and civil society intervention in Cambodia, and who/which actors in particular you are referring to?
Without the introduction of a specific debate or discursive pattern, involving actual actors or actual statements, your critique reads a bit vague to me.
Maybe the Bangkok bookshops only had a few copies. I passed through Singapore airport a couple of weeks ago and there were stacks of them there, where it was published.
Is the intro to this piece out-of-date? I was under the impression that the World Bank had announced in July 2011 that Lao PDR was no longer classified as a Least Developed Country.
I tried to buy a copy of the book when in Bangkok in December. They were sold out and I was told a new printing would be ready by February. Just in case you want to read it…
i say again, have patience! the way you are teaching other people just show how big a braggart you are! this is particularly true of the xenophobic bengali extremists of Bangladesh! your kind of language and authorship arakan history is no bette than that of a typical garbage picking guys in bangladesh. if you are so ignorant of arakan history as it is evident from your writeups, first learn the history first, and that too, not with one eye shut tight.
you are just a fine example of the least educated ph d holder the world has ever seen. read your own language before you go to teach out there!
I’m curious about the notion of apostasy discussed here and I wonder if anyone can answer these questions.
I was brought up as a Catholic Christian. After much consideration and thought about the doctrines of my church, over years and years and years, I found myself simply unable to believe in those doctrines. I did not declare this inability to believe for some years. I continued to go to church and take the sacraments but without any belief in them.
I wanted to believe. I just couldn’t.
Then I was an apostate but also a hypocrite.
Now I’m an apostate but no longer a hypocrite.
Which is better?
How can it benefit the world or a religion by a person who does not believe having to pretend to believe.
There is a statement from Proverbs or Psalms which I think both Christians, Muslims and Jews agree with: “The fool says in his heart there is no god”.
Ok, call me a fool – I can deal with that but don’t kill me or persecute me.
That the author, whose name we dare not speak, is actually mentioned and referred to in A Life’s Work is a major accomplishment in this culture. I guess I will celebrate the small successes. And I love the classical response from the establishment/royalists that this book was “gossipy” and “inaccurate.” Anand, what else could it be in your closed culture? Where was Handley or any scholar to get “accurate” information? Where else was he to turn? To the projectionist from your Ministry of Propaganda?
Where are the great books by Thai scholars examining the relationship between Buddhism, monarchy, and the historical process in Thailand? (Not by royalist sycophants.) Where are the different points of view of monarchy in Thailand written by Thai scholars? Where is this wonderful debate on a large stage?
Anand, for the second book by this wonderful committee why don’t you enlist the brightest of Thai scholars, just Thai, to offer a wide array of points of view and have them debate these issues. Better yet, have the King write a preface supporting the importance of vigorous debate about the most sacred of Thai institutions.
I’m wondering about Nic’s comment 12. I may be mistaken but I thought one of the bases of the charges against Gi Ungpakorn was that he referenced TKNS.
In any case, presumably the pooyai like Anand and the writers and committee who are responsible for the book’s content and publication obviously must have access to the book. It stinks that it’s obviously OK for the well-connected and those in high places to read the book but the hoi polloi aren’t allowed to and people like Joe Gordon get charged with LM and throw in jail for linking to it or translating it.
Also, consider this mealy mouthed phrase: “The book, which has not been distributed in Thailand,…” . What? Not distributed because of some publishing accident or a total lack of demand?
Plan B unfortunately is beyond the pale. Like Myanmar Patriots still fighting the colonialists whilst comfortably ensconced in Europe, he fulfills a similar role from Oz, both serving the interests of the regime and both manifesting the regime’s inherent now concealed hatred of ASSK. Now that the regime has changed tack and the Lady is in the bag, they find themselves in a bit of an awkward position. Still it doesn’t stop plan B banging on about the ‘useless careless west’.
Chip Chasterton nailed it on the head.That’s the wood plan B and many others won’t see for the trees. If the regime thinks they can militarily subjugate the minorities and develop trade and industry over their mass graves, thay’ve got another think coming. ASSK dropped the idea of second Panglong when she obviously feared it would amount to confrontation. Was the Lady ever for confrontation? She certainly is for a U turn. She finally chose cooperation which most of us except the politically naive and ever-optimistic idealists see as collaboration.
Roland Watson’s DICTATOR WATCH TEN YEAR REVIEW, October 17, 2011, shows us a way, but recent ‘reconciliation’ at the top between the regime and ASSK/NLD, aided and abetted by the US/EU, does not bode well unless the West completely out of character gives priority to peace and genuine reconciliation over market/business objectives. The future is none too bright since it is dependent on the leopard species of the regime and the West changing their spots. http://www.dictatorwatch.org/DWtenyear.pdf
OK, so go on living like a Muslim then, no one is stopping you, but why poke your nose into someone else’s believe… whether that someone is Muslim or not.
Where does it say in the Koran that one Muslim can dictate to another how they should lead their live? Let Allah be the judge, if you so believe. Aren’t you usurping Allah’s authority when you dictate what Allah is suppose to say?!?
You are all but fools! As a loyal Thai ‘subject’, I watched the recent passing of Kim-Jong-il with interest. How sincerely his people yearn for his guidance like the children they are. So that I can imitate those very same loyal acts when the moment arrives!
Re. Thai-American relations, my wife and I celebrated today our 43rd anniversary. She is more or less a dye-in-the-wool Yellow/anti-Thaksin, and I tend to be a bit more liberal/conservative at times…Anyway, we avoided slugging it out and instead watched Woody’s Suriyasai-Jatuporn coup de grace for extremists who feel opposing sides should not countenance one another.
I’d be genuinely delighted to hear some intelligent arguments on why the book is valuable – so far all I have read are two astoundingly inept and fawning reviews in the Bangkok Post, plus the Sydney Morning Herald story which was clearly written without detailed knowledge of the book’s contents.
My review is likely to be overwhelmingly negative, so it would be very useful to listen to some sensible arguments that challenge my own view, it would help me formulate a more rounded opinion.
So, can you explain in more detail your conclusion that “the book brings out just how constrained even the King is in carrying out his work and how artfully Bhumibol has gone about doing what he thought was best for Thailand”?
In particular, I’d like to know what is “artful” about fanning the flames of the current conflict by publishing such an unreconstructedly hyper-royalist propaganda tract that can only serve to alienate moderate Thais already very troubled by the direction their country is going.
Islam is a religion and to Muslims it’s a way of life. Its about having faith and living every seconds of your life in it. Islamic teachings stressed on a life after death – the Hereafter. To understand the concept of the hereafter is another issue. But, it correlates to most of the Islamic law and how you live your life in the world today. I believe it is simply not enough to discuss apostasy in an academic way without understanding the whole truth in Islam; the pillars of Islam; the concept of ‘ibadah’ and how all these finally relates to the Judgment Day. To discuss only specifically on apostasy is like a blind man holding an elephant’s tail and trying to describe how big the animal is. Thank you for those who tried to learn and understand on the apostasy issue; but clearly there is still a lot more to understand first in Islam rather than only looking at the end of it.
Mong Pru,
Please have patience and be respectful when making argument. Mong Pru, you have so much to learn not just about Arakan history but about how to be polite with the people you are debating . Please read the response of Mr. Shaw, and see even when he doesn’t agree with me he is not acting like you. You wrote”This is how you got a PhD on Arakan history? You are a great disgrace even to your own motherland, Bangladesh!”Look, what I have presented in the article above, I have provided references. This is how I have learnt from the West to work as a researcher on Arakan and a teacher on Interpersonal communication. If I were an angry person like you, and acting on your lrvel, I would be saying, “Stop behaving like a maruding Magh” or that “you are acting like an teenager in a high school.” because, as a teacher myself, I don’t encourage such behavior as yours.”If you continue like that we have to stop our debate here.
I suggest that you should stop and first see howI and Mr. Shaw continue with each other. We are going to start with a principle called ” we agree to disagree.” Which means that even when we have differences, we should be respectful. This is because, these issues are about history and state policies not about us personally. For example, when I used to talk to Aye Chan, we became friends, I even invited him to Canada and said I would welcome him to stay at my place. In my almost 20 pages review of Dr. Aye Chan’s work “Enclave…” I never ever used foul words like Mong Pru is familiar with.( I checked your other responses) Here you see I am not saying Mr. Mong Pru, because of the type of his behavior.
Wait a movement, I have a second thought. I think you are not the one I should be debating with. But if you understand what I said to you , you can join us later on in the debate. For now you control your emotion. Also before you join us, I want to know from you what do you do for living and what is your educational level. This is important because, in the past I had a debate with a Rakhine Mogh man from Netherland who was a dishwasher in the kitchen. He was acting with foul mouth. I can see Mong Pru is very poor not only in his communication skills but also in his knowledge of history. So before you join us let me know what do you do.
Next I will come back to respond to Mr. Shaw and we will continue. If we keep patience, I have a lot of issues to deal with in the dabate. But emember, even with a PhD I am not an encyclopedia, however, I promise I will do my best. Before I start the debate let me leave you something to read.
About the name “Rohingya,” readers might find the following brief note (abstract) interesting.
————————————————————————————–Constraints to Acceptance and the Discernment of the Symbiosis of Parasitism-A Study of the Rakhine-Rohinga Relations in Burma, paper presented in the English Department, Lethbridge University, Alberta, Canada.
Abid Bahar
When minority members from various splinter groups but with a common historic background of suffering and as a matter of survival mechanism takes on a common identity, it could be seen by the dominat group controling the scarce resources as a threat and dehumanize them to the symbiosis of parasitism.
Burma is a country ruled by the military through the use of xenophobia against non-Buddhist ethnic and racial groups. A study done on the so-called “kulas”(connoting being inferior, dark skinned people) of the Arakan state of Burma (Kulas are the Rohingyas) shows that Rohingyas perhaps following the Rakhines (who upto the 30’s used to be called “Mogh” “Mug,” pirate took on the name Rakhines) similarly Rohingyas took on a new identity the “Rohingya”(People from the old village) but now been dubbed in race-based stereotyping by the Rakhine-Burman ultranationalist media in Arakan as being the”Influx Viruses” (dangerous foreigners) on one hand and on the other, for the new name the military junta government have officially declared the Rohingyas as the noncitizens of Burma.The official media now propagates saying “we have never heard of this people in Burma,” these people are like “Orgies”and forcefully exterminates them, an interesting case of an ethnic group’s identity formation in response to the constraints to acceptance, resulting in the symbiosis of parasites in their country of birth, resulting even in their becoming statelesss.
The book brings out just how constrained even the King is in carrying out his work and how artfully Bhumibol has gone about doing what he thought was best for Thailand.
@Maratjp #8: “Thailand doesn’t need a book glorifying a king. It needs discussion all throughout Thailand on what place monarchy should have in a modern Thai nation.”
One famous quote by American author Upton Sinclair reads “‘It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
BBC under fire on Rohingyas
Dialogue with Mr. Min Shwe
——————————
Understanding the Rohingya People: Similarities and differences between Bengalis and the Rohingya people of Arakan (part 1)
Mr. Shaw,
Historically speaking, due to its location on a racial faultline, Arakan has remained an epicentre of refugee production in the region until our present time. In understanding this phenomena, for historians in particular, I think several dates are significant in the history of Arakan, beginning from 957 AD, through the 1430, 1660, 1666, 1784,1824 and 1982. In consideration of the above premise, when I say most of the Rohingyas have historically similar background as was with people of Bengal until the 11th century, I mean several things:
(1) Like in Arakan, Bengal was first Hindu then became Mohayana buddhist. In Arakan, the Mohanuni statue was by the Mohayana buddhists of the Chandra time and racially people were 100% of Indo-Aryan stock.”The coins of Wasali had the image of Siva engraved on it.” Arakan was known to Indian missionaries as the “Kalamukha” (land of the dark-skinned people). “The second phase of Indianization of Arakan occurred between the 4th and the 6th century AD, by which time the colonists had established their kingdom, and named their capital Vaishali.” By this time Arakan became a Mohayana buddhist kingdom. As a port city, Vaishali also developed some pockets of Muslim settlements from Arab and Persian businessman who on their way to the East settled in Arakan and Chittagong. In the process the name Arakandesa, Arakan, Arabic and Desha is Sanskrit became the name of the kingdom. This was Arakan until the middle of the 10th century.What was the language of these people? The language of the Chandras was proto-Chittagonian: Sanskrit, Pali, and Arabic mixed. See the ”The Anand Chandra Inscription, which contains 65 verses (71 and a half lines) and now sited at the Shitthaung pagoda, provides some information about these early rulers. .. This 11-foot high monolith, unique in entire Burma, has three of its four faces inscribed in a Nagari script, which is closely allied to those of Bengali and north-eastern India. There is no trace Burmese or Arakani script on it.
(2) Something happened, historians records in 957 AD when Tibeto-Burman people in large numbers entered Arakan and took its cntrol over defeating the Chandra Mohayanas and imposing Hinayana buddhism, the latter adapted from the Mons in the south who in their turn took it from Sri Lanka. Similar changes didn’t happen in Bengal. In Bengal, most Mohayana Buddhist were converted to Islam by Sufi mystics. With the fall of Arakan to the look alike Tibeto-Burmans, the Chandra Indians were either pushed to the north of Arakan or some even left Arakan for Bengal. Around this time, the defeated Chandra Royal family was found to settle in Chittagong proper. The Dev Pahar, named after Dev Chandra was the site of the new buddhist kingdom. In North Arakan, mostly Chandra Hindus (lower casts also known as the Rakkhas) slowly adapted Islam converted by the already existing Muslims of Arakan and Persian descent and most buddhist elites joined the Tibeto-Burnan Theraveda group or a defeated small number of buddhist adopted Islam. Arakan became on one hand Theraveda buddhist with largely Tibeto Burman stock, later came to be known as the “Mog/ Mug”. Moghs settled in the south and Muslims, Hindus and the other kulas Indian look alike people settled in the north. Durinng the Chandra times and to its end in Arakan, we see the traces of Arabic names such as Rambree, Sufi sites on Myu Mountain tops, and Badre Patis in the Northern part of Arakan. From the 11th century, clearly with the Tibeto-Burman rule, Arakan now began to look east only until the year 1430. (Continues to part 2).
Land and conflict in Cambodia
Hi Tim Frewer:
Thanks for your interesting post and the reporting from Kompong Thom.
As I read through the posting however… and encounter phrases such as these:
—–
“…often an implicit assumption, made by some analysts of Cambodia…”
“It is common within development and research circles…”
“…commonly held assumptions …”
“Within the context of Cambodia where NGOs tend to see themselves as the sole legitimate actors who can represent village interests…”
“NGO’s are largely coerced – whether they actually believe in it or not – to follow the comfortable liberal conception of society…”
“The typical NGO solution…”
“…the majority of NGOs…”
“The point of all this is not to entirely dismiss NGO efforts…”
“Much of the development industry…”
“Yet few people seem to consider it problematic when NGOs and donors…”
“A similar lack of balance is often a characteristic…”
“…massive number of NGOs which…”
——
… I’m left wondering how you arrived at such an assessment of the situation with donor and civil society intervention in Cambodia, and who/which actors in particular you are referring to?
Without the introduction of a specific debate or discursive pattern, involving actual actors or actual statements, your critique reads a bit vague to me.
Regards,
– Keith Barney
There is no question…
Maybe the Bangkok bookshops only had a few copies. I passed through Singapore airport a couple of weeks ago and there were stacks of them there, where it was published.
Chinese merchants of Vientiane
Is the intro to this piece out-of-date? I was under the impression that the World Bank had announced in July 2011 that Lao PDR was no longer classified as a Least Developed Country.
There is no question…
I tried to buy a copy of the book when in Bangkok in December. They were sold out and I was told a new printing would be ready by February. Just in case you want to read it…
BBC under fire on Rohingyas
abid bahar
i say again, have patience! the way you are teaching other people just show how big a braggart you are! this is particularly true of the xenophobic bengali extremists of Bangladesh! your kind of language and authorship arakan history is no bette than that of a typical garbage picking guys in bangladesh. if you are so ignorant of arakan history as it is evident from your writeups, first learn the history first, and that too, not with one eye shut tight.
you are just a fine example of the least educated ph d holder the world has ever seen. read your own language before you go to teach out there!
Apostasy in Malaysia: The hidden view
I’m curious about the notion of apostasy discussed here and I wonder if anyone can answer these questions.
I was brought up as a Catholic Christian. After much consideration and thought about the doctrines of my church, over years and years and years, I found myself simply unable to believe in those doctrines. I did not declare this inability to believe for some years. I continued to go to church and take the sacraments but without any belief in them.
I wanted to believe. I just couldn’t.
Then I was an apostate but also a hypocrite.
Now I’m an apostate but no longer a hypocrite.
Which is better?
How can it benefit the world or a religion by a person who does not believe having to pretend to believe.
There is a statement from Proverbs or Psalms which I think both Christians, Muslims and Jews agree with: “The fool says in his heart there is no god”.
Ok, call me a fool – I can deal with that but don’t kill me or persecute me.
There is no question…
Nich,
That the author, whose name we dare not speak, is actually mentioned and referred to in A Life’s Work is a major accomplishment in this culture. I guess I will celebrate the small successes. And I love the classical response from the establishment/royalists that this book was “gossipy” and “inaccurate.” Anand, what else could it be in your closed culture? Where was Handley or any scholar to get “accurate” information? Where else was he to turn? To the projectionist from your Ministry of Propaganda?
Where are the great books by Thai scholars examining the relationship between Buddhism, monarchy, and the historical process in Thailand? (Not by royalist sycophants.) Where are the different points of view of monarchy in Thailand written by Thai scholars? Where is this wonderful debate on a large stage?
Anand, for the second book by this wonderful committee why don’t you enlist the brightest of Thai scholars, just Thai, to offer a wide array of points of view and have them debate these issues. Better yet, have the King write a preface supporting the importance of vigorous debate about the most sacred of Thai institutions.
That would be greatness.
There is no question…
I’m wondering about Nic’s comment 12. I may be mistaken but I thought one of the bases of the charges against Gi Ungpakorn was that he referenced TKNS.
In any case, presumably the pooyai like Anand and the writers and committee who are responsible for the book’s content and publication obviously must have access to the book. It stinks that it’s obviously OK for the well-connected and those in high places to read the book but the hoi polloi aren’t allowed to and people like Joe Gordon get charged with LM and throw in jail for linking to it or translating it.
Also, consider this mealy mouthed phrase: “The book, which has not been distributed in Thailand,…” . What? Not distributed because of some publishing accident or a total lack of demand?
No, not distributed because it was banned.
Breath-taking hypocrisy.
Burma’s independence and the year ahead
Plan B unfortunately is beyond the pale. Like Myanmar Patriots still fighting the colonialists whilst comfortably ensconced in Europe, he fulfills a similar role from Oz, both serving the interests of the regime and both manifesting the regime’s inherent now concealed hatred of ASSK. Now that the regime has changed tack and the Lady is in the bag, they find themselves in a bit of an awkward position. Still it doesn’t stop plan B banging on about the ‘useless careless west’.
Chip Chasterton nailed it on the head.That’s the wood plan B and many others won’t see for the trees. If the regime thinks they can militarily subjugate the minorities and develop trade and industry over their mass graves, thay’ve got another think coming. ASSK dropped the idea of second Panglong when she obviously feared it would amount to confrontation. Was the Lady ever for confrontation? She certainly is for a U turn. She finally chose cooperation which most of us except the politically naive and ever-optimistic idealists see as collaboration.
Roland Watson’s DICTATOR WATCH TEN YEAR REVIEW, October 17, 2011, shows us a way, but recent ‘reconciliation’ at the top between the regime and ASSK/NLD, aided and abetted by the US/EU, does not bode well unless the West completely out of character gives priority to peace and genuine reconciliation over market/business objectives. The future is none too bright since it is dependent on the leopard species of the regime and the West changing their spots.
http://www.dictatorwatch.org/DWtenyear.pdf
Apostasy in Malaysia: The hidden view
Yang bernama Muhammad,
OK, so go on living like a Muslim then, no one is stopping you, but why poke your nose into someone else’s believe… whether that someone is Muslim or not.
Where does it say in the Koran that one Muslim can dictate to another how they should lead their live? Let Allah be the judge, if you so believe. Aren’t you usurping Allah’s authority when you dictate what Allah is suppose to say?!?
There is no question…
You are all but fools! As a loyal Thai ‘subject’, I watched the recent passing of Kim-Jong-il with interest. How sincerely his people yearn for his guidance like the children they are. So that I can imitate those very same loyal acts when the moment arrives!
It’s all in the crying!
Culture and rights in Thailand
Re. Thai-American relations, my wife and I celebrated today our 43rd anniversary. She is more or less a dye-in-the-wool Yellow/anti-Thaksin, and I tend to be a bit more liberal/conservative at times…Anyway, we avoided slugging it out and instead watched Woody’s Suriyasai-Jatuporn coup de grace for extremists who feel opposing sides should not countenance one another.
There is no question…
phktresident #14
I’d be genuinely delighted to hear some intelligent arguments on why the book is valuable – so far all I have read are two astoundingly inept and fawning reviews in the Bangkok Post, plus the Sydney Morning Herald story which was clearly written without detailed knowledge of the book’s contents.
My review is likely to be overwhelmingly negative, so it would be very useful to listen to some sensible arguments that challenge my own view, it would help me formulate a more rounded opinion.
So, can you explain in more detail your conclusion that “the book brings out just how constrained even the King is in carrying out his work and how artfully Bhumibol has gone about doing what he thought was best for Thailand”?
In particular, I’d like to know what is “artful” about fanning the flames of the current conflict by publishing such an unreconstructedly hyper-royalist propaganda tract that can only serve to alienate moderate Thais already very troubled by the direction their country is going.
Thanks!
Apostasy in Malaysia: The hidden view
Islam is a religion and to Muslims it’s a way of life. Its about having faith and living every seconds of your life in it. Islamic teachings stressed on a life after death – the Hereafter. To understand the concept of the hereafter is another issue. But, it correlates to most of the Islamic law and how you live your life in the world today. I believe it is simply not enough to discuss apostasy in an academic way without understanding the whole truth in Islam; the pillars of Islam; the concept of ‘ibadah’ and how all these finally relates to the Judgment Day. To discuss only specifically on apostasy is like a blind man holding an elephant’s tail and trying to describe how big the animal is. Thank you for those who tried to learn and understand on the apostasy issue; but clearly there is still a lot more to understand first in Islam rather than only looking at the end of it.
BBC under fire on Rohingyas
Mong Pru,
Please have patience and be respectful when making argument. Mong Pru, you have so much to learn not just about Arakan history but about how to be polite with the people you are debating . Please read the response of Mr. Shaw, and see even when he doesn’t agree with me he is not acting like you. You wrote”This is how you got a PhD on Arakan history? You are a great disgrace even to your own motherland, Bangladesh!”Look, what I have presented in the article above, I have provided references. This is how I have learnt from the West to work as a researcher on Arakan and a teacher on Interpersonal communication. If I were an angry person like you, and acting on your lrvel, I would be saying, “Stop behaving like a maruding Magh” or that “you are acting like an teenager in a high school.” because, as a teacher myself, I don’t encourage such behavior as yours.”If you continue like that we have to stop our debate here.
I suggest that you should stop and first see howI and Mr. Shaw continue with each other. We are going to start with a principle called ” we agree to disagree.” Which means that even when we have differences, we should be respectful. This is because, these issues are about history and state policies not about us personally. For example, when I used to talk to Aye Chan, we became friends, I even invited him to Canada and said I would welcome him to stay at my place. In my almost 20 pages review of Dr. Aye Chan’s work “Enclave…” I never ever used foul words like Mong Pru is familiar with.( I checked your other responses) Here you see I am not saying Mr. Mong Pru, because of the type of his behavior.
Wait a movement, I have a second thought. I think you are not the one I should be debating with. But if you understand what I said to you , you can join us later on in the debate. For now you control your emotion. Also before you join us, I want to know from you what do you do for living and what is your educational level. This is important because, in the past I had a debate with a Rakhine Mogh man from Netherland who was a dishwasher in the kitchen. He was acting with foul mouth. I can see Mong Pru is very poor not only in his communication skills but also in his knowledge of history. So before you join us let me know what do you do.
Next I will come back to respond to Mr. Shaw and we will continue. If we keep patience, I have a lot of issues to deal with in the dabate. But emember, even with a PhD I am not an encyclopedia, however, I promise I will do my best. Before I start the debate let me leave you something to read.
About the name “Rohingya,” readers might find the following brief note (abstract) interesting.
————————————————————————————–Constraints to Acceptance and the Discernment of the Symbiosis of Parasitism-A Study of the Rakhine-Rohinga Relations in Burma, paper presented in the English Department, Lethbridge University, Alberta, Canada.
Abid Bahar
When minority members from various splinter groups but with a common historic background of suffering and as a matter of survival mechanism takes on a common identity, it could be seen by the dominat group controling the scarce resources as a threat and dehumanize them to the symbiosis of parasitism.
Burma is a country ruled by the military through the use of xenophobia against non-Buddhist ethnic and racial groups. A study done on the so-called “kulas”(connoting being inferior, dark skinned people) of the Arakan state of Burma (Kulas are the Rohingyas) shows that Rohingyas perhaps following the Rakhines (who upto the 30’s used to be called “Mogh” “Mug,” pirate took on the name Rakhines) similarly Rohingyas took on a new identity the “Rohingya”(People from the old village) but now been dubbed in race-based stereotyping by the Rakhine-Burman ultranationalist media in Arakan as being the”Influx Viruses” (dangerous foreigners) on one hand and on the other, for the new name the military junta government have officially declared the Rohingyas as the noncitizens of Burma.The official media now propagates saying “we have never heard of this people in Burma,” these people are like “Orgies”and forcefully exterminates them, an interesting case of an ethnic group’s identity formation in response to the constraints to acceptance, resulting in the symbiosis of parasites in their country of birth, resulting even in their becoming statelesss.
Desperately seeking Marylene
Olivier
Drop me an email….
Pavin
There is no question…
The book brings out just how constrained even the King is in carrying out his work and how artfully Bhumibol has gone about doing what he thought was best for Thailand.
There is no question…
@Maratjp #8: “Thailand doesn’t need a book glorifying a king. It needs discussion all throughout Thailand on what place monarchy should have in a modern Thai nation.”
One famous quote by American author Upton Sinclair reads “‘It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Where China meets India
Nich
Thanks for the link