I’m sorry, but what exactly is that link between religiosity and say, job creation? There are plenty of countries which are nonreligious, yet prosperous (Norway and should be fair examples).
Further to Somsak and Jim Taylor on the relationship between Thaksin and the “Ammat”:
I think that one possible explanation for PT’s enthusiastic crackdown on LM may relate to the “Brunei agreement” earlier this year. Thaksin’s political support was so strong and so consistent, even after everything the royalists had thrown at them since the conflict began in 2005, that if Thaksin had continued to have been kept out of office the prospect for political polarization was seen as so destabilizing for the country and dangerous for the monarchy that it was enough to bring the Palace to the table to strike a deal – which Crispin wrote about in his article. This may explain why Abhisit was so lacklustre in the election campaign: knowing that the deal had already been done he was just “going through the motions” of campaigning.
Now that his government has received the imprimatur of the highest authority, so to speak, Thakin’s modus operandi for the time being – ie. while his opponents keep to their part of the bargain – may be to just make sure the PT politicians, their coalition partners, and their constituencies are “well looked after” with the spoils of office. That is, they focus on the bread and butter issues of the voters to make sure that they retain their mass support base which keeps them in power, while cracking down on the academic and liberal critics of the monarchy in order to placate the royal family and conservatives and to demonstrate that they are keeping their part of the deal. The other part of the deal would be that Abhisit, Suthep, and the military leadership would escape any prosecution for their involvement in the April-May 2010 killings.
I think that the “anti-LM lobby” is still so small, isolated and politically weak that the political calculation may be that no-one would really kick up a fuss over the PT’s crackdown on LM. As long as PT keeps its rural base happy by delivering Thaksin-style “populist” policies there is little if any political damage to the government over this abstract human rights issue that is really only meaningful to the small liberal section of the middle class. It is very significant that the Red Shirts and the PT, who have demonstrated that they have the power to “radicalize” their grass roots supporters (eg. by mobilizing hundreds of thousands of them to march on Bangkok), are silent on LM. And it’s not as if anyone would change their vote to the Democrats with the expectation that they would reform LM. The only political reason for PT to act on reforming LM would be to attack the monarchy, which is not in PT’s political interests under the current deal.
It’s almost conceivable to imagine that the reason that it is royalists like Anand, Pramot, Khamnun, and the Bangkok Post who have come out in support of LM reform, is not out of any true liberal desire to have the law reformed but to try to break up the deal between Thaksin and the palace. That is, it’s a way of attacking Thaksin.
Somsak: I wonder what would be the reaction if the current police chief were to recommend against a recommendation that LM charges be prosecuted? Wouldn’t it be a giant royalist attack on the government for disloyalty? How does the government get out of this disloyalty spiral into royalism?
interesting piece. A little fn: 2 of the three Malaysian academics she quotes or refers to are hardly role models for faith-based capital – rather they are well known political apologists for the system which has been rotting – including in academia – from the head down.
Malaysian Muslims have not a deep strong culture, thus going to pray in mosques is the only thing that holds them up. So where’s the faith that may bring hope to people of other faiths?
A point of clarification on Marzuki’s comment #19.
It was unethical of Anwar Ibrahim to seek government by way of defection of Members of Parliament on the infamous Sept 16.
The last thing that fair minded Malaysians wanted was for Barisan Nasional to be replaced by another Barisan Nasional type government.
But importantly, what Anwar Ibrahim sought to do is not illegal within Malaysian laws. Unethical/Immoral, Yes; Illegal, No.
Malaysian laws allows for “party hopping” or crossing the aisle. In fact, if one analyses Malaysian parliamentary and state legislature history, Barisan Nasional has remained in power at the state levels on various occasions through this “party hopping.”
I personally am against party hopping and was against Anwar Ibrahim’s attempt to form government through this unethical means.
Why Thais are unique. Thais herein defined as Thais who make decisions for others. I was emailed this a while ago and am not sure whether everyone agrees with all, some or none of it…
1. They are unique because they cling to the uniqueness mantra.
2. They are unique because they depart from minimal standards of human rights protections.
3. They are unique because they practice loyalty by force.
4. They are unique because the prohibit self-determination.
5. They are unique because they snub their noses at common sense.
6. They are unique because they do not accept the reality of consequences of their dogmas and desires.
7. They are unique because so far they have been insulated from the consequences of their wayward ways.
8. They are unique because their history is something that has not been honestly admitted to by them, or openly taught.
9. They are unique because they pretend the rose has no thorn, that questions never need be asked or answered.
10.They are unique because they know and you do not.
In all of this, uniqueness is but an illusion. This kind of uniqueness is so repetitious throughout history that it is childish to claim it.
That was the email. does this describe only Thais, or all peoples in all nations? Or just Asians? Or only farangs?
[…] the majority of the population and key players and provides a reasonable starting point. Thus far, confusion and distress have arisen from a lack of experience and humility in handling this issue, the failure of current […]
1. Are the “111 of the best pro-democratic pollies earlier banned by the amaat” out there active against 112, the new computer crime law and the evil old laws about criminal libel?
2. The disgusting thought of “PTP making a compact with the regime accountable for the 2010 massacre ” – has this not already come to pass with the coup leader General Sonthi Boonyaratkalin and the King Prajadhipok’s Institute running the “reconciliation ” process and an amnesty bill to absolve all – except LM “offenders” – from their political and human rights crimes?
Also Ji says our hope lies in rank & file Red shirts rather than Peur Thai .
I have seen this “You are not Thai, you do not understand Thailand” mantra all the time. Have those people ever read what “farangs” have written before they point out the finger to them and said they do not understand? Most of the articles which “farangs” wrote which I have read contain a very detailed analysis of the way Thai people think, and I can say that those analysis are mostly very accurate.
Besides, who is that father and mother the author is talking about anyway? I have only one father and one mother, and FYI, I openly criticise what they do whenever they did something which I think is not suitable, and they listen to me. They know that my criticism is made for a good purpose. Anyone who refuses to criticise their father and mother’s behaviour when there is a need to criticise, is expressing their love in a wrong way.
I believe that to love is to be honest, to tell the person you love of both the things they want to hear and the things they do not want to hear. You praise them to make them feel proud of their achievements, but you must also criticise them because nobody is perfect. A society which forbids criticism is nothing but an insincere society where people refuse to acknowledge the problems around them. The problems will not go away if one does not rectify it. It will remain, and it will continue to surmount. And one day the whole thing will burst all at once, and there may be serious consequences.
The author speaks of a dimension almost non existent in Malaysia.
This dimension of the Soul is lost to them now. They are at base level of what can I get for myself and in the shortest possible time. “If they have it why can’t I” is the thinking and all possible manifested conduct is displayed to get what they want when they want and to the extent ( almost always ) of injuring another in many ways.
Malaysia had to sink low to understand the other side of the coin. The opposite of bad is good. This fundamental truth has been lost in Malaysia and thus it has to sink to where it is today for it to change.
Justice, benevolence and peace are higher Realms that Malayisa is not at all aware off enough, let alone apply in conduct.
This is directly connected to the level of awareness of the Soul whether indivdually or as a collective,the Soul of a nation. They are a people unaware. They imitate , without deeper seeking so the meaning is lost to them as the author rightly describes, failing to ponder and have no incling towards a higher realm and thus the result is chaos as we see.
However that is the necessary precondition to the start of awareness.
We need to experience bad in order to implement Good, to come to Being Good. Perhaps the cycle will begin for Malaysia, whether individually, or collectively as a group.
I wouldn’t be so sure that this latest case, and two other new cases (one also a university lecturer, the other a junior university student) are all the work of the so-called “am-mart”, as Jim Taylor says.
True, all three involve incidents that happened during the previous government, and the process started there. But, the final decision to lay charge and issue summons was made definitely during this government. And according to the government’s own statement, all LM cases have to go through reviews by special committee at the central authorities, i.e. agencies like the Police HQ and DSI, not the local police precincts who are the one formally laying charge and issuing the summon. And nowadays, these agencies are under the control of the government (the Police Chief is the PM’s relative), not any so-called “am-mart”.
As I write these lines, a new round of LM crackdown just began. Yesterday, police visited a home of a blogger with a search warrant. His fate is still uncertain, he hasn’t been heard since he posted the news on his fb of the search. I was also learned that a group of police had gone to the residence of the webmaster of a very well-known website, although luckily he wasn’t there. The police apparently said they were not seeking his arrest but just wanted to invited him to talk. There were also unconfirmed report of similar incidents. All these happened as part of Cha-lerm-led efforts to, as he himself declared, shut down 200 LM websites, and he clearly kept his word that yesterday would be the “D-Day”, the start of the crackdown.
I think the relationship and attitudes of the Thaksin camp toward the so-called “am-mart”, or to be more precise, the palace circle, is more complicated than Jim would like to admit. I don’t think Chalerm’s action could be entirely attributed to the “division” within the camp either; I cannot imagine it being taken without some tacit or explicit green light from his boss.
If the PTP stands idle and do nothing while the elites are using lese majeste to jail people, it will lose the support from the Red Shirt people. I also believe (and let me repeat that it is only my belief) that PTP will be ousted soon by the elites. It is up to them to show the Red Shirts at the time where they are still in office whether they agree or disagree with lese majeste law. If they act in a way that they disagree with lese majeste, they won’t lose the Red’s support. Vice versa. The Salims and the yellow will not vote for them anyway. So it is futile for them to show loyalty.
This from the Bangkok Post on recent murder of Democrat politician:
“The chief of military staff had even called Chutidet to offer him financial assistance in a district council seat he was running for, she said, making it highly improbable that the officer wanted her husband dead.”
I wonder…what venues does a military chief of staff use in a democratic society to support political candidates?
The ammat has failed to bring down Yingluck by water coup (this too may sound preposterous to Vichai) so their next attempt must be via the courts. We have seen this in the EC trying to disqualify Chatuporn as MP but all the EC can do is only refer the case to the Constitutional Court. After that, the EC will try to blame white-haired Yongyuth in Chatuporn’s case and call for PTP dissolution.
But ammat know time is not in their side as they know May 2012 is approaching fast and they must do it before this deadline. They can see the House of 111 (Chaturong, Pongthep) have openly started making public comments. So the only option is by a military coup (another “preposterous” idea which even Prayuth himself does not dare to think of doing) but who knows what happens when a dog is cornered in a narrow soi).
However, what I want to see after May 2012 is whether Chalerm can work together with Sudarat because both share the same power base, namely Bangkok.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Malaysia losing “faith capital values”
I’m sorry, but what exactly is that link between religiosity and say, job creation? There are plenty of countries which are nonreligious, yet prosperous (Norway and should be fair examples).
Another academic victim of 112
Further to Somsak and Jim Taylor on the relationship between Thaksin and the “Ammat”:
I think that one possible explanation for PT’s enthusiastic crackdown on LM may relate to the “Brunei agreement” earlier this year. Thaksin’s political support was so strong and so consistent, even after everything the royalists had thrown at them since the conflict began in 2005, that if Thaksin had continued to have been kept out of office the prospect for political polarization was seen as so destabilizing for the country and dangerous for the monarchy that it was enough to bring the Palace to the table to strike a deal – which Crispin wrote about in his article. This may explain why Abhisit was so lacklustre in the election campaign: knowing that the deal had already been done he was just “going through the motions” of campaigning.
Now that his government has received the imprimatur of the highest authority, so to speak, Thakin’s modus operandi for the time being – ie. while his opponents keep to their part of the bargain – may be to just make sure the PT politicians, their coalition partners, and their constituencies are “well looked after” with the spoils of office. That is, they focus on the bread and butter issues of the voters to make sure that they retain their mass support base which keeps them in power, while cracking down on the academic and liberal critics of the monarchy in order to placate the royal family and conservatives and to demonstrate that they are keeping their part of the deal. The other part of the deal would be that Abhisit, Suthep, and the military leadership would escape any prosecution for their involvement in the April-May 2010 killings.
I think that the “anti-LM lobby” is still so small, isolated and politically weak that the political calculation may be that no-one would really kick up a fuss over the PT’s crackdown on LM. As long as PT keeps its rural base happy by delivering Thaksin-style “populist” policies there is little if any political damage to the government over this abstract human rights issue that is really only meaningful to the small liberal section of the middle class. It is very significant that the Red Shirts and the PT, who have demonstrated that they have the power to “radicalize” their grass roots supporters (eg. by mobilizing hundreds of thousands of them to march on Bangkok), are silent on LM. And it’s not as if anyone would change their vote to the Democrats with the expectation that they would reform LM. The only political reason for PT to act on reforming LM would be to attack the monarchy, which is not in PT’s political interests under the current deal.
It’s almost conceivable to imagine that the reason that it is royalists like Anand, Pramot, Khamnun, and the Bangkok Post who have come out in support of LM reform, is not out of any true liberal desire to have the law reformed but to try to break up the deal between Thaksin and the palace. That is, it’s a way of attacking Thaksin.
Nam Theun 2: what about the Xe Bang Fai?
An update on the NT2: Please feel free to read my blog on my field trip to the Xai Bang Fai villages:
http://cgbsadventures.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/villages-of-the-xe-beng-fai/
The situation is dire after this years floods.
More to come about the Nakai Plateau soon…
Another academic victim of 112
Somsak: I wonder what would be the reaction if the current police chief were to recommend against a recommendation that LM charges be prosecuted? Wouldn’t it be a giant royalist attack on the government for disloyalty? How does the government get out of this disloyalty spiral into royalism?
Malaysia losing “faith capital values”
interesting piece. A little fn: 2 of the three Malaysian academics she quotes or refers to are hardly role models for faith-based capital – rather they are well known political apologists for the system which has been rotting – including in academia – from the head down.
Malaysia losing “faith capital values”
Malaysian Muslims have not a deep strong culture, thus going to pray in mosques is the only thing that holds them up. So where’s the faith that may bring hope to people of other faiths?
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
Self-restraint eh?
Or the convenience of indifference and disinterest, often masquerading as kreng jai or fettered by the chains of modern day feudalism.
Will UMNO give up power?
A point of clarification on Marzuki’s comment #19.
It was unethical of Anwar Ibrahim to seek government by way of defection of Members of Parliament on the infamous Sept 16.
The last thing that fair minded Malaysians wanted was for Barisan Nasional to be replaced by another Barisan Nasional type government.
But importantly, what Anwar Ibrahim sought to do is not illegal within Malaysian laws. Unethical/Immoral, Yes; Illegal, No.
Malaysian laws allows for “party hopping” or crossing the aisle. In fact, if one analyses Malaysian parliamentary and state legislature history, Barisan Nasional has remained in power at the state levels on various occasions through this “party hopping.”
I personally am against party hopping and was against Anwar Ibrahim’s attempt to form government through this unethical means.
I have written about it HERE.
However, what happened in Perak is strictly extra-constitutional. Not only immoral but outright illegal.
Read the opinion by the learned judge NH Chan on this matter. NH Chan looked at this issue also from a broader perspective.
A book has been compiled on this matter also. A review is provided HERE.
UMNO has a history of using the Malay monarchies but so has the Malay monarchies. Read a review of this relationship HERE.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
Not sure what happened a moment ago…
Why Thais are unique. Thais herein defined as Thais who make decisions for others. I was emailed this a while ago and am not sure whether everyone agrees with all, some or none of it…
1. They are unique because they cling to the uniqueness mantra.
2. They are unique because they depart from minimal standards of human rights protections.
3. They are unique because they practice loyalty by force.
4. They are unique because the prohibit self-determination.
5. They are unique because they snub their noses at common sense.
6. They are unique because they do not accept the reality of consequences of their dogmas and desires.
7. They are unique because so far they have been insulated from the consequences of their wayward ways.
8. They are unique because their history is something that has not been honestly admitted to by them, or openly taught.
9. They are unique because they pretend the rose has no thorn, that questions never need be asked or answered.
10.They are unique because they know and you do not.
In all of this, uniqueness is but an illusion. This kind of uniqueness is so repetitious throughout history that it is childish to claim it.
That was the email. does this describe only Thais, or all peoples in all nations? Or just Asians? Or only farangs?
The power of Singlish
singlish “act cute” = Thai “Ab Baew”
The power of Singlish
walao, why you so like that? act so blur.
Malaysian Muslims responses to conversion
[…] the majority of the population and key players and provides a reasonable starting point. Thus far, confusion and distress have arisen from a lack of experience and humility in handling this issue, the failure of current […]
Another academic victim of 112
A couple of questions for Jim Taylor:
1. Are the “111 of the best pro-democratic pollies earlier banned by the amaat” out there active against 112, the new computer crime law and the evil old laws about criminal libel?
2. The disgusting thought of “PTP making a compact with the regime accountable for the 2010 massacre ” – has this not already come to pass with the coup leader General Sonthi Boonyaratkalin and the King Prajadhipok’s Institute running the “reconciliation ” process and an amnesty bill to absolve all – except LM “offenders” – from their political and human rights crimes?
Also Ji says our hope lies in rank & file Red shirts rather than Peur Thai .
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
I have seen this “You are not Thai, you do not understand Thailand” mantra all the time. Have those people ever read what “farangs” have written before they point out the finger to them and said they do not understand? Most of the articles which “farangs” wrote which I have read contain a very detailed analysis of the way Thai people think, and I can say that those analysis are mostly very accurate.
Besides, who is that father and mother the author is talking about anyway? I have only one father and one mother, and FYI, I openly criticise what they do whenever they did something which I think is not suitable, and they listen to me. They know that my criticism is made for a good purpose. Anyone who refuses to criticise their father and mother’s behaviour when there is a need to criticise, is expressing their love in a wrong way.
I believe that to love is to be honest, to tell the person you love of both the things they want to hear and the things they do not want to hear. You praise them to make them feel proud of their achievements, but you must also criticise them because nobody is perfect. A society which forbids criticism is nothing but an insincere society where people refuse to acknowledge the problems around them. The problems will not go away if one does not rectify it. It will remain, and it will continue to surmount. And one day the whole thing will burst all at once, and there may be serious consequences.
Malaysia losing “faith capital values”
The author speaks of a dimension almost non existent in Malaysia.
This dimension of the Soul is lost to them now. They are at base level of what can I get for myself and in the shortest possible time. “If they have it why can’t I” is the thinking and all possible manifested conduct is displayed to get what they want when they want and to the extent ( almost always ) of injuring another in many ways.
Malaysia had to sink low to understand the other side of the coin. The opposite of bad is good. This fundamental truth has been lost in Malaysia and thus it has to sink to where it is today for it to change.
Justice, benevolence and peace are higher Realms that Malayisa is not at all aware off enough, let alone apply in conduct.
This is directly connected to the level of awareness of the Soul whether indivdually or as a collective,the Soul of a nation. They are a people unaware. They imitate , without deeper seeking so the meaning is lost to them as the author rightly describes, failing to ponder and have no incling towards a higher realm and thus the result is chaos as we see.
However that is the necessary precondition to the start of awareness.
We need to experience bad in order to implement Good, to come to Being Good. Perhaps the cycle will begin for Malaysia, whether individually, or collectively as a group.
Another academic victim of 112
I wouldn’t be so sure that this latest case, and two other new cases (one also a university lecturer, the other a junior university student) are all the work of the so-called “am-mart”, as Jim Taylor says.
True, all three involve incidents that happened during the previous government, and the process started there. But, the final decision to lay charge and issue summons was made definitely during this government. And according to the government’s own statement, all LM cases have to go through reviews by special committee at the central authorities, i.e. agencies like the Police HQ and DSI, not the local police precincts who are the one formally laying charge and issuing the summon. And nowadays, these agencies are under the control of the government (the Police Chief is the PM’s relative), not any so-called “am-mart”.
As I write these lines, a new round of LM crackdown just began. Yesterday, police visited a home of a blogger with a search warrant. His fate is still uncertain, he hasn’t been heard since he posted the news on his fb of the search. I was also learned that a group of police had gone to the residence of the webmaster of a very well-known website, although luckily he wasn’t there. The police apparently said they were not seeking his arrest but just wanted to invited him to talk. There were also unconfirmed report of similar incidents. All these happened as part of Cha-lerm-led efforts to, as he himself declared, shut down 200 LM websites, and he clearly kept his word that yesterday would be the “D-Day”, the start of the crackdown.
I think the relationship and attitudes of the Thaksin camp toward the so-called “am-mart”, or to be more precise, the palace circle, is more complicated than Jim would like to admit. I don’t think Chalerm’s action could be entirely attributed to the “division” within the camp either; I cannot imagine it being taken without some tacit or explicit green light from his boss.
Another academic victim of 112
If the PTP stands idle and do nothing while the elites are using lese majeste to jail people, it will lose the support from the Red Shirt people. I also believe (and let me repeat that it is only my belief) that PTP will be ousted soon by the elites. It is up to them to show the Red Shirts at the time where they are still in office whether they agree or disagree with lese majeste law. If they act in a way that they disagree with lese majeste, they won’t lose the Red’s support. Vice versa. The Salims and the yellow will not vote for them anyway. So it is futile for them to show loyalty.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
As I was reading the article, part way through it, I had to look up at the URL to make sure I wasn’t at Not The Nation.
New Mandala: cowardly, stupid and lacking in wisdom
This from the Bangkok Post on recent murder of Democrat politician:
“The chief of military staff had even called Chutidet to offer him financial assistance in a district council seat he was running for, she said, making it highly improbable that the officer wanted her husband dead.”
I wonder…what venues does a military chief of staff use in a democratic society to support political candidates?
Another academic victim of 112
The ammat has failed to bring down Yingluck by water coup (this too may sound preposterous to Vichai) so their next attempt must be via the courts. We have seen this in the EC trying to disqualify Chatuporn as MP but all the EC can do is only refer the case to the Constitutional Court. After that, the EC will try to blame white-haired Yongyuth in Chatuporn’s case and call for PTP dissolution.
But ammat know time is not in their side as they know May 2012 is approaching fast and they must do it before this deadline. They can see the House of 111 (Chaturong, Pongthep) have openly started making public comments. So the only option is by a military coup (another “preposterous” idea which even Prayuth himself does not dare to think of doing) but who knows what happens when a dog is cornered in a narrow soi).
However, what I want to see after May 2012 is whether Chalerm can work together with Sudarat because both share the same power base, namely Bangkok.