Interesting analysis, but it’s worth mentioning that the author is Mr. Thaksin’s PR representative (this is not a vague “paid by X” allegation, the link is quite public).
Thaksin is in no way a champion of transparency, democracy, or human rights, he was just cast in a position where he’s using those forces to regain power. He would drop the democratic mask in a snap and support authoritarian, “prerogative state” forces in a snap if he calculated he’d benefit — in fact, he’s been consistently trying to coopt those elements.
I think you’ll find that the matter of ip number security is nowhere near as secure as you would like.
My understanding is that discussions between the University and the Thai embassy have already taken place, and that even though the decision not to reveal locations of posters was made, the university wavered in light of the potential award of research funds.
If I were you, I would play safe and not make any assumptions in this regard. Thais know very well how to subvert otherwise solid principles. Personally, I operate through a series of proxies and even that may not be as secure as I would like, trusting others in matters of freedom of expression and financial inducements must be earned.
Thanks for the clarification. My source of (mis)information was a Thai Air Force officer who once explained to me how Siam had designed and produced two aircraft in the 1920s, one a fighter called the Prajadhipok in honour of the king, and the other a bomber called the Boriphat in honour of his preferred successor.
Not all of my posted comments leave me open to charges of lese majeste, but some of them have. I would never have expected Harry’s comments to see him arrested and sentenced to six years in gaol, but he was. Unlike those who are safely outside Thailand and have no plans to return, I’m not prepared to take that risk.
If my comments are unsubstantiated, then so are those of many others. They still contain information which I consider interesting and worthy of serious consideration.
“Pounding the table would’ve been counter-productive”. For whom? For Harry. If Australia had objected loudly and publicly, he would have spent a considerably longer time in gaol. The US is able to apply far heavier pressure on Pakistan and the Philippines than Australia ever could on Thailand. Persuasion has far more chance of success. The aim of the Thai treatment of Harry was deterrence, and it certainly appears to have worked. Name one Australian writer who has since made similar comments and then returned to Thailand to test the reaction. And no, I don’t think all human rights abuses should be greeted with such “quiet effective diplomacy”. I don’t think Thailand is a special case. But I do think that negotiation without the unwelcome glare of publicity can be more effective than strident public demands, compliance with which would be humiliating. No-one, and certainly not the Thai government, likes to be told what to do. They’re rather more receptive to polite requests.
Obsession? Something more like ‘fear of the inevitable, based on previous experience’ would seem far more appropriate – tempered by the inevitable failure of the Democrats to be a real and effective opposition.
It would be only fair to warn you, that large quantities of fruit and nut-based products have previously been processed on the same production line as the present government.
Pavin, yes with full respect I shall agree to disagree 🙂 but I think we only differ on a matter of emphasis regarding motivation for the 1924 law.
Seh Fah #16 Prince Boriphat was in fact 12 years older than Prajadhipok. Prajadhipok proposed the more experienced Boriphat as an alternative to his own succession in 1925. In his abdication Prajadhipok refused to name a successor but it is assumed that he would still have favoured Boriphat. But Boriphat was completely unacceptable to the People’s Party as he had been, together with Purachatra, perhaps the very target that the 1932 coup sought to remove from power.
I once read that Phibul/Pridi looked to Prince Mahidol’s line because they had known Mahidol from their Paris days and respected his common approach. I’m not sure how accurate that is. But as you say a compliant Regency would fully suited their purpose.
I’m sure CT is right that rough successions outnumber smooth. Helping Jesse with the 700 year history, lets not forget the great King Narai whose demise in 1688 led to much blood letting in the family.
Thaksin had systematically undermined virtually all of the checks and balances of a democratic system, leaving the army as the last unbalanced check.
Thaksin made us do it. I tried that with my mom when I was about ten and learned very quickly that some excuses are so base and intolerable that even my sainted mom’s eyes shot sparks at the pusillanimous temerity of someone, even/especially, her own offspring to mouth something so lame and shameful.
Which state is the “real” state? The forces of darkness, the Royal Thai Army and Democrat Party at the fore, actually and publicly pledge allegiance to the Prerogative State. That’s what LM persecutions, party dissolutions, and abrogation of the Constitution, the rule of law, are all about.
Yes the battle for democracy begins and will be fought in the Normative State, but the real power in terms of the ruthlessness to resort to violent coercion lies with the Royal Thai Army and the Democrat Party. They are the self-selected Real Thais fighting to preserve their Real Thailand… their Prerogative State.
Unless and until the Prerogative State is ‘delegitimated’… to use a term floating about the present buzz sphere… and its minions recognized as anti-democratic and, hence, anti-Thai, the real battle in the Normative State cannot even begin, subject as it is and has been to continuing cycles of arbitrary beheading and rebirth at the prerogative of its nemesis.
Whether Robert Amsterdam appropriated this argument to serve the purposes of his client or not, this seems a compact and accurate analysis of the state of the State in Thailand, according to my lights.
The minions of the Prerogative State are the real Outlaws and all of Thailand must stand up and publicly acknowledge that fact before real progress can be made toward democracy.
I do think that you need to understand issues better before even attempting to debate.
For example AP. Do you really understand what is AP really is ? Do you know that AP is meant to help to develop bumi businessmen in the automotive industry ? Like the NEP, it has noble aim but been abused. In any case, it is also given to genuine manufacturers and not just bumis to import cars.
Registration requirements are only certain, small contracts are reserved for bumis and not all contracts.
As I had argued before, the policies are never “pro-Malay” but affirmative actions for bumis. The reason for this is also clear as the bumis are the poorest. And this not only includes Malays but also other natives. As I had said earlier, you do need to understand the issues before debating. Otherwise, you will end up sounding like Malaysian Insider / Malaysia Kini /etc.
BTW you did not answer my previous argument where I stated the Chinese business being racist by employing only Chinese. Unlike the NEP which means to help the economically needy, the practices of the Chinese business discriminates the Malays, Indians, etc. That they are private business, does not absolve them.
As for Greg, he’s an academic and not an anonymous commentator. He has the responsibility to defend his work and cannot shrink away by labeling me as a paid UMNO agent. For the beginning I had been arguing and debating in a factual and civilised manner. My questions been based purely on his articles. But by refusing to engage in a debate, he’s only admitting that he got it wrong.
My thanks and compliments to D.N. for what strikes me as one of the most perceptive and realistic summaries of Thailand’s tortuous progress I can remember seeing.
I’m a little bemused by your suggestion that “it’s usual for bureaucrats to try to milk each situation to the maximum for their own benefit”. How exactly were Australian consular officers and other embassy “bureaucrats”, as you call them, milking Harry’s incarceration for their own benefit?
The damage done to democracy and Thailand by the Democrat Party’s menagerie of mistakes since 2006 scarcely exceeds that done by the Thai Rak Thai Party’s menagries of mistakes prior to 2006. Thaksin had systematically undermined virtually all of the checks and balances of a democratic system, leaving the army as the last unbalanced check. And what have we now? Regime exchange, not regime change.
But your comment is not only anonymous it is also unsubstantiated and its only evidence is based on the comment itself.
Therefore it can’t really be taken that seriously.
I am also not sure how your comments concerning Aus embassy involvement leave you open to arrest and imprisonment.
“Pounding the table would’ve been counter-productive”. For whom? Australian govt and business interests? Such “table pounding” by the US was incredibly effective in Pakistan in the Raymond Davis case and in the Subic rape case in the Philippines – they got their people free (rapists/killers = good v bloggers = bad).
And why, given this “effective diplomacy”, have LM cases skyrocketed in the last few years? One could argue that the international communty’s insipid response has actually emboldened the use of LM.
Do you think all human rights abuses should be greeted with such “quiet effective diplomacy”?
I understand that when King Prajadhibok abdicated in 1934, his preferred successor, in the absence of any children of his own, was his half-brother Prince Boriphat, a British-trained air force pilot who was younger, in excellent health, the father of several sons, and a forceful personality who could have performed very effectively as a constitutional monarch.
The reasons for King Prajadhibok’s preference were seen by the Khana Ratsadorn as reasons to reject Prince Boriphat. Hence the choice of the 8-year-old Ananda, thereby ensuring a 12-year regency during the course of which the last vestiges of the absolute monarchy could be removed. Until Field Marshal Sarit …
In my opinion, Thailand has more ‘rough’ succession than the smooth ones.
-King Taksin and his family were killed by King Rama I.
-King Rama IV had to go into monkhood to avoid the potential danger from King Rama III after King Rama II passed away.
-King Rama VII had been forced to abdicate, to make way for King Rama VIII.
-King Rama VIII was killed in his bedroom, which made King Rama IX crowned as King.
And if anyone ever reads only a quarter of the Wikileaks Cables on Thailand, they will know that there are a lot of parties who are fighting for the power on this upcoming succession from Rama IX to King Rama X. The parties who are now struggling for the Crown are
1) Crown Prince and his wife Srirasmi
2) Queen Sirikit (with the plan of becoming the Regent for Prince Dipangkorn)
3) Princess Sirindhorn
I think most successions are rough, even bloody at times. I don’t think most have been smooth, in my not-humble-whatsoever opinion :)…The upcoming succession particularly will be very unpredictable and likely…very rough…but hopefully, it won’t be ‘bloody’. I would hate to see more people die in this silly power strugle.
Whatever position Mr Amsterdam holds in regards to Thaksin, it doesnt downgrade the analysis and comment on the Democrat party, every word of which is spot on including Thailand’s need to have a viable alternative to the current government. And yet so little comment is ever made on the subject of the damage done to democracy and Thailand by the Democrat party’s menagerie of mistakes since 2005 especially inside the party itself. The Thaksin obsession leaves so many blind to so much that needs to be changed
I disagree. After Crown Prince Vajirunhis passed away untimely, King Chulalongkorn then elevated Prince Vajiravudh to the title of Crown Prince. King Chulalongkorn switched from the Savang Vadhana line to Saovabha Bongsri line, even when he could select Prince Sommatiwongse (still alive in 1895–the year the Prince Vajirunhis’s death), or as a matter of fact Prince Mahidol Adulyadej–they were all brothers of Prince Vajirunhis. Prince Vajiruvudh became the Crown Prince because he was the next oldest son, after Prince Vajirunhis. I saw this as a controversy surrounding the succession during the end of the Chulalongkorn period.
Thus, when King Vajiravudh enacted the Palace Law of Succession in 1924, he ensured that the law gave “priorities” to the descendants of the princes born to his own direct family line, Queen Saovabha, then to Queen Savang Vadhana and to Queen Sukumala subsequently.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Amsterdam on Thailand’s dual state
Interesting analysis, but it’s worth mentioning that the author is Mr. Thaksin’s PR representative (this is not a vague “paid by X” allegation, the link is quite public).
Thaksin is in no way a champion of transparency, democracy, or human rights, he was just cast in a position where he’s using those forces to regain power. He would drop the democratic mask in a snap and support authoritarian, “prerogative state” forces in a snap if he calculated he’d benefit — in fact, he’s been consistently trying to coopt those elements.
US legal action on lese majeste
CT (post 2):
I think you’ll find that the matter of ip number security is nowhere near as secure as you would like.
My understanding is that discussions between the University and the Thai embassy have already taken place, and that even though the decision not to reveal locations of posters was made, the university wavered in light of the potential award of research funds.
If I were you, I would play safe and not make any assumptions in this regard. Thais know very well how to subvert otherwise solid principles. Personally, I operate through a series of proxies and even that may not be as secure as I would like, trusting others in matters of freedom of expression and financial inducements must be earned.
Thailand’s succession planning
Pete S #17
Thanks for the clarification. My source of (mis)information was a Thai Air Force officer who once explained to me how Siam had designed and produced two aircraft in the 1920s, one a fighter called the Prajadhipok in honour of the king, and the other a bomber called the Boriphat in honour of his preferred successor.
FACT’s plea for Joe Gordon
Andrew Spooner #88
Not all of my posted comments leave me open to charges of lese majeste, but some of them have. I would never have expected Harry’s comments to see him arrested and sentenced to six years in gaol, but he was. Unlike those who are safely outside Thailand and have no plans to return, I’m not prepared to take that risk.
If my comments are unsubstantiated, then so are those of many others. They still contain information which I consider interesting and worthy of serious consideration.
“Pounding the table would’ve been counter-productive”. For whom? For Harry. If Australia had objected loudly and publicly, he would have spent a considerably longer time in gaol. The US is able to apply far heavier pressure on Pakistan and the Philippines than Australia ever could on Thailand. Persuasion has far more chance of success. The aim of the Thai treatment of Harry was deterrence, and it certainly appears to have worked. Name one Australian writer who has since made similar comments and then returned to Thailand to test the reaction. And no, I don’t think all human rights abuses should be greeted with such “quiet effective diplomacy”. I don’t think Thailand is a special case. But I do think that negotiation without the unwelcome glare of publicity can be more effective than strident public demands, compliance with which would be humiliating. No-one, and certainly not the Thai government, likes to be told what to do. They’re rather more receptive to polite requests.
FACT’s plea for Joe Gordon
Seh Fah #89
“milking Harry’s incarceration for their own benefit?”
no, claiming success after his release is what I had in mind.
Amsterdam on Thailand’s dual state
Obsession? Something more like ‘fear of the inevitable, based on previous experience’ would seem far more appropriate – tempered by the inevitable failure of the Democrats to be a real and effective opposition.
It would be only fair to warn you, that large quantities of fruit and nut-based products have previously been processed on the same production line as the present government.
Thailand’s succession planning
Pavin, yes with full respect I shall agree to disagree 🙂 but I think we only differ on a matter of emphasis regarding motivation for the 1924 law.
Seh Fah #16 Prince Boriphat was in fact 12 years older than Prajadhipok. Prajadhipok proposed the more experienced Boriphat as an alternative to his own succession in 1925. In his abdication Prajadhipok refused to name a successor but it is assumed that he would still have favoured Boriphat. But Boriphat was completely unacceptable to the People’s Party as he had been, together with Purachatra, perhaps the very target that the 1932 coup sought to remove from power.
I once read that Phibul/Pridi looked to Prince Mahidol’s line because they had known Mahidol from their Paris days and respected his common approach. I’m not sure how accurate that is. But as you say a compliant Regency would fully suited their purpose.
I’m sure CT is right that rough successions outnumber smooth. Helping Jesse with the 700 year history, lets not forget the great King Narai whose demise in 1688 led to much blood letting in the family.
Amsterdam on Thailand’s dual state
Thaksin made us do it. I tried that with my mom when I was about ten and learned very quickly that some excuses are so base and intolerable that even my sainted mom’s eyes shot sparks at the pusillanimous temerity of someone, even/especially, her own offspring to mouth something so lame and shameful.
We live and learn. Never too late.
Amsterdam on Thailand’s dual state
Which state is the “real” state? The forces of darkness, the Royal Thai Army and Democrat Party at the fore, actually and publicly pledge allegiance to the Prerogative State. That’s what LM persecutions, party dissolutions, and abrogation of the Constitution, the rule of law, are all about.
Yes the battle for democracy begins and will be fought in the Normative State, but the real power in terms of the ruthlessness to resort to violent coercion lies with the Royal Thai Army and the Democrat Party. They are the self-selected Real Thais fighting to preserve their Real Thailand… their Prerogative State.
Unless and until the Prerogative State is ‘delegitimated’… to use a term floating about the present buzz sphere… and its minions recognized as anti-democratic and, hence, anti-Thai, the real battle in the Normative State cannot even begin, subject as it is and has been to continuing cycles of arbitrary beheading and rebirth at the prerogative of its nemesis.
Whether Robert Amsterdam appropriated this argument to serve the purposes of his client or not, this seems a compact and accurate analysis of the state of the State in Thailand, according to my lights.
The minions of the Prerogative State are the real Outlaws and all of Thailand must stand up and publicly acknowledge that fact before real progress can be made toward democracy.
Thailand’s economic success
There are not as good data on income disparity, and it is not measured annually.
The GINI coefficient is the most widely used one. Ratings are between 0 and 100 where 0 is perfect equality. So the higher number the more inequality.
Thailand: 42
Malaysia: 49.2
Indonesia: 34.3
China: 46.9
Singapore: 42.5
United States: 40.8
Australia: 35.2
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality
Malaysia – a simple institutional analysis
Neptunian
I do think that you need to understand issues better before even attempting to debate.
For example AP. Do you really understand what is AP really is ? Do you know that AP is meant to help to develop bumi businessmen in the automotive industry ? Like the NEP, it has noble aim but been abused. In any case, it is also given to genuine manufacturers and not just bumis to import cars.
Registration requirements are only certain, small contracts are reserved for bumis and not all contracts.
As I had argued before, the policies are never “pro-Malay” but affirmative actions for bumis. The reason for this is also clear as the bumis are the poorest. And this not only includes Malays but also other natives. As I had said earlier, you do need to understand the issues before debating. Otherwise, you will end up sounding like Malaysian Insider / Malaysia Kini /etc.
BTW you did not answer my previous argument where I stated the Chinese business being racist by employing only Chinese. Unlike the NEP which means to help the economically needy, the practices of the Chinese business discriminates the Malays, Indians, etc. That they are private business, does not absolve them.
As for Greg, he’s an academic and not an anonymous commentator. He has the responsibility to defend his work and cannot shrink away by labeling me as a paid UMNO agent. For the beginning I had been arguing and debating in a factual and civilised manner. My questions been based purely on his articles. But by refusing to engage in a debate, he’s only admitting that he got it wrong.
Amsterdam on Thailand’s dual state
c3
My thanks and compliments to D.N. for what strikes me as one of the most perceptive and realistic summaries of Thailand’s tortuous progress I can remember seeing.
FACT’s plea for Joe Gordon
David Brown #79
I’m a little bemused by your suggestion that “it’s usual for bureaucrats to try to milk each situation to the maximum for their own benefit”. How exactly were Australian consular officers and other embassy “bureaucrats”, as you call them, milking Harry’s incarceration for their own benefit?
Amsterdam on Thailand’s dual state
Nobody #5
The damage done to democracy and Thailand by the Democrat Party’s menagerie of mistakes since 2006 scarcely exceeds that done by the Thai Rak Thai Party’s menagries of mistakes prior to 2006. Thaksin had systematically undermined virtually all of the checks and balances of a democratic system, leaving the army as the last unbalanced check. And what have we now? Regime exchange, not regime change.
FACT’s plea for Joe Gordon
Seh Fah
But your comment is not only anonymous it is also unsubstantiated and its only evidence is based on the comment itself.
Therefore it can’t really be taken that seriously.
I am also not sure how your comments concerning Aus embassy involvement leave you open to arrest and imprisonment.
“Pounding the table would’ve been counter-productive”. For whom? Australian govt and business interests? Such “table pounding” by the US was incredibly effective in Pakistan in the Raymond Davis case and in the Subic rape case in the Philippines – they got their people free (rapists/killers = good v bloggers = bad).
And why, given this “effective diplomacy”, have LM cases skyrocketed in the last few years? One could argue that the international communty’s insipid response has actually emboldened the use of LM.
Do you think all human rights abuses should be greeted with such “quiet effective diplomacy”?
Or is Thailand a special case?
Thailand’s succession planning
I understand that when King Prajadhibok abdicated in 1934, his preferred successor, in the absence of any children of his own, was his half-brother Prince Boriphat, a British-trained air force pilot who was younger, in excellent health, the father of several sons, and a forceful personality who could have performed very effectively as a constitutional monarch.
The reasons for King Prajadhibok’s preference were seen by the Khana Ratsadorn as reasons to reject Prince Boriphat. Hence the choice of the 8-year-old Ananda, thereby ensuring a 12-year regency during the course of which the last vestiges of the absolute monarchy could be removed. Until Field Marshal Sarit …
Thailand’s succession planning
In my opinion, Thailand has more ‘rough’ succession than the smooth ones.
-King Taksin and his family were killed by King Rama I.
-King Rama IV had to go into monkhood to avoid the potential danger from King Rama III after King Rama II passed away.
-King Rama VII had been forced to abdicate, to make way for King Rama VIII.
-King Rama VIII was killed in his bedroom, which made King Rama IX crowned as King.
And if anyone ever reads only a quarter of the Wikileaks Cables on Thailand, they will know that there are a lot of parties who are fighting for the power on this upcoming succession from Rama IX to King Rama X. The parties who are now struggling for the Crown are
1) Crown Prince and his wife Srirasmi
2) Queen Sirikit (with the plan of becoming the Regent for Prince Dipangkorn)
3) Princess Sirindhorn
I think most successions are rough, even bloody at times. I don’t think most have been smooth, in my not-humble-whatsoever opinion :)…The upcoming succession particularly will be very unpredictable and likely…very rough…but hopefully, it won’t be ‘bloody’. I would hate to see more people die in this silly power strugle.
Amsterdam on Thailand’s dual state
Whatever position Mr Amsterdam holds in regards to Thaksin, it doesnt downgrade the analysis and comment on the Democrat party, every word of which is spot on including Thailand’s need to have a viable alternative to the current government. And yet so little comment is ever made on the subject of the damage done to democracy and Thailand by the Democrat party’s menagerie of mistakes since 2005 especially inside the party itself. The Thaksin obsession leaves so many blind to so much that needs to be changed
Thailand’s succession planning
Pete (12)
I forgot to say, although we disagree, I respect your opinion.
Thailand’s succession planning
Pete (12)
I disagree. After Crown Prince Vajirunhis passed away untimely, King Chulalongkorn then elevated Prince Vajiravudh to the title of Crown Prince. King Chulalongkorn switched from the Savang Vadhana line to Saovabha Bongsri line, even when he could select Prince Sommatiwongse (still alive in 1895–the year the Prince Vajirunhis’s death), or as a matter of fact Prince Mahidol Adulyadej–they were all brothers of Prince Vajirunhis. Prince Vajiruvudh became the Crown Prince because he was the next oldest son, after Prince Vajirunhis. I saw this as a controversy surrounding the succession during the end of the Chulalongkorn period.
Thus, when King Vajiravudh enacted the Palace Law of Succession in 1924, he ensured that the law gave “priorities” to the descendants of the princes born to his own direct family line, Queen Saovabha, then to Queen Savang Vadhana and to Queen Sukumala subsequently.