Hai John #8, I would agreed with you except for the fact that the Thais did not get the govt they voted for! The govt they voted for was sacked by the army / juditiary / whoever ? amart? I don’t know
NM is to be congratulated for kicking off a discussion that led to a rare, good editorial being written in the BKK Post.
Optimistic thoughts are rare these days, so let me just say that ten years ago anything resembling the following paragraph would have never made it into any Thai newspaper:
“The unfairness of the lese majeste law is that anyone can file a complaint and there are no guidelines as to the interpretation of the law. What did the people charged by the military actually say to earn them the charge? The media is not allowed to let us know. Is it considered lese majeste to advocate the abolishment of the lese majeste law, or to criticise institutions under royal patronage? No one knows the boundaries of interpretation.”
I see Phue Thai is offering an executive amnesty decree if they win. Everything done since 2006 will be forgiven. From the Post we have this quote from a well known supporter of democracy.
Although the PAD had earlier voiced its opposition to an amnesty law it would likely agree with the Pheu Thai’s amnesty decree now that its leaders are facing terrorism charges for blocking two Bangkok airports in 2008, Mr. Chalerm said.
I wonder if that’s true. I always suspected that among the PAD there were quite a few willing to be martyrs so it could well be wrong and we could see the yellow shirts in the streets again.
Of course the local press will be full of ‘vote Yingluck get Thaksin’ but don’t forget you get Chalerm and a few others too.
i disagree with New Mandala. i think Pheau Thai Party must be happy with the NO vote campaign coz yellow shirts represents/supports the current military backed Democrat government. no vote campaign will effect more to current government than to opposition.
An absolutely fascinating theory – and perfectly in line with how Thais treat each other even today. I’m afraid egalitarianism will be a long time coming in Thailand (as it was in Europe) regardless of who wins what election over the next generation of two. All pretence at democracy will be a sham until all Thais intuitively feel and believe each other to be on an equal footing (excuse the pun). As it stands, some academics still infer that the majority of the population are a “non-mainstream sub-culture.”
Sure, there’s an Hegelian dialect being played out and the only aim is for the winner to amass wealth and power but once in a coloured moon the elites and wannabe elite are at war with each other.
The aim is to encourage that inner circle conflict by voting in the unwelcome party and then not participating when both sides are at peace with each other.
New Mandala readers following this story closely will want to see what Political Prisoners in Thailand has to say. All of the details are available here.
At the end of the day Thai people deserve who they vote for.
No amount of outside discussion will make a difference, as I have often been told as a foreigner I could never understand ‘Thainess’ no matter how much I read or research.
It is not difficult to see what historically has evolved in Thailand yet the Thais themselves accept what in many cases has been forced upon them.
A great man once said ‘Forgive them for they know not what they do.
There is hope as in an age of global communication maybe there will be a way for the misdirected to find the light and actually see what those in power are actually doing to them and finally say enough!
I think you shouldnt put up any hope with anyone at this point (yes not Yingluck, not Abhisit). Thailand’s problem is not about who should get the power, but rather, how the country should reform (or revolutionize) itself from the current elite centralized power structure to the one that allows grass root to have more political say in the country’s affair and for to the country be more open and more “democratic”. Certainly neither PT nor DP promote that particular agenda.
Nganadeeleg @1, I’m with you. I hated Thaksin because of his hostility to the free press and obvious cronyism, positions I still stand by, but I’ll readily admit that my convictions that he was the “most corrupt ever” was based on ignorance of the Thai par for corruption.
The last five years have been a hard, complex, frustrating but enlightening education in Thai politics. My wife used to idolize the king and marched with the PAD in 2005 — and now she reads Prachathai and is ready to vote PT. Her friends, unfortunately, just cover their ears and drink the yellow Kool-aid.
Like many reasonable Thais I know, I still feel great anxiety that Thaksin’s return will bring the same autocracy/press hostility/cronyism/power consolidation /patronage corruption that we saw from 2002-2006.
But on principle it is preferable to the current autocracy/press hostility/cronyism/power consolidation /patronage corruption of the unelected military and monarchist elite.
To paraphrase Churchill, Thaksin is the worst possible Thai leader, except for all the others.
I feel a bit like a spoiler but…(here is my penny worth): it is not a question the positioning of two political actors or even parties in terms of their respective virtues or otherwise…This makes too many assumptions that are not able to be substantiated. The game plan is far more complex that mere personalities, gendered or otherwise. In this piece we risk losing a vision of the forest for the trees. We know that since late 2006 the amaat regime took on a new and aggressive front in order to claw back power once and for all from an emerging inclusive democratic process; [other than sporadic events post Oct 1976…] No, to my mind it is not about political “partying”. It is about summit dominance over culture, economy, politics, [perceived morality] and a desperately lost civil society, all orchestrated by certain military actors close to the palace in a compact with the notoriously corrupt DP Party [as a face of Thai Parliamentary democracy]; the latter which as AW says, has long benefitted from coups to establish a political platform to rule and control resources and roll out personal benefits. Simply put: it matters little who wins at the polls (and assuming it is going to be fair – which it will not) because we know who will not lose: the amaat regime, which will continue its maintain its control by whatever means over government and policy outcomes.
Jeez, nothing like a bit of bias and axe-grinding. I thought that New Mandala was supposed to be an academically-oriented site? Where’s the analysis?
We already have access to endless quantities of serial partisan ranting. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, I just think a bit of analysis and some honest debate would be a lot more useful than an additional venue for political team sports.
It is purely Thaksin’s billions that gives him appeal and to many of his supporters, legitimacy. It doesn’t matter how this wealth was amassed as many powerful people in the kingdom have gained power through illegal means.
Money politics in Thailand is what perpetuates the divide in the kingdom as it reinforces the archaic and corrupt ‘patronage system’ which Thaksin when in power, fully utilized so as to appear to be a champion of the poor.
What differences his little sister will bring as a leader is anyone’s guess ,yet the power of the families enormous wealth will certainly be taken into account when Thais go to the polls.
It looks very much as if I have been unclear (27) about what I think is an interesting connection between grovelling (prostration) and the Thai attitude to foot gestures.
In the days before Chulalongkorn abolished slavery and grovelling, a slave was required to grovel, with his face pointed downwards whenever he was in the presence of his master. He was never allowed to look up. It seems to me that in that situation, especially if the slave was from a recently conquered region, and understood only the language/dialect of that region, the master would tend to give his instructions with foot gestures, pointing with a foot where he expected the slave to go, for example.
If I am right about this fairly recent Thai history, to gesture to someone with a foot, even these days, is to treat him like a slave. This seems to me to be a better explanation of why foot gestures are resented than the usual one, that the foot is a low part of the body.
To a certain extent this is common to all cultures. A kick in the arse is the most insulting form of violence, because it was typical of the relations between a master and his grovelling slave.
Finally, the revival of grovelling in the Thai Royal Court, is clearly an attempt to reassert the master-slave relationship between the King and his people. It reflects badly on Bhumibol, especially when we compare him with the much more enlightened, polite, and courageous Chulalongkorn.
A few years ago I’d have agreed that it’s a step back in time. But let’s not forget the unstoppable power of demographics. We’ve had six years of the old guard dying off, six years of the able becoming increasingly disabled, and six glorious years of new blood coming into the game.
Few are privy to who pulls what strings at the elite level, but one thing is for sure.
They’re six years closer to their expiration date.
It’s just a matter of time. Deep down they know they’re clinging on to the past. It’s a losing battle because attachment is suffering.
Just wondering, what’s the more complex version of the whole thing? Its not that I think this conflict is simply ammart vs prai like you said, but this is to be the conflict that decided what Thailand will become in the next 30 years or so, so I’m really curious what do you think is the deeper meaning of all these?
That’s a big question which is beyond me, but I can elaborate on my own thoughts anyway. It’s a conflict between two reactionary sets of political opportunists, representing old and new power structures, each deeply anti-democratic. Both appeal to the public in the language of reform, although the capitalists speak it more fluently and seductively.
But beyond polemics, how much substance do we find in their calls to reform? Which side offers a plan for restoring the independence of the judiciary? Which is talking seriously about reforming the police? Who’s standing up for a free press? Who is serious about improving the education system, beyond gimmicks and giveaways? Who is willing to counter the unchecked exploitation of the land and water that so many Thais depend on for a living? Keeping the army in a locker under civilian control? Unfortunately, neither side is–and that’s why we should hope that this isn’t the conflict that will Thailand’s path forward for the next 30 years.
The real agenda for reform in Thai society has been raised not by politicians but civil society, which had something of a heyday in the pre-Thaksin years but has been taking cover ever since. Both reactionary camps resist this public input. Personally, I feel that the capitalists have been more virulent in suppressing civil society. Look at the assassinations of 14 environment activists during Thaksin’s first term. Not to be outdone, once they discovered the power of lese majeste, the royalists have found their own secret weapon to suppress dissent. But at least there’s a law to be fought against. How do you repeal a hitman?
So what is the deeper meaning? Two regressive patronage networks vying against one another to enrich themselves at the expense of the freedom and prosperity of the nation. Let’s hope we don’t have to wait 30 years for an alternative.
Google a 2009 PhD thesis entitled ‘Status City: Consumption, Identity, and Middle Class Culture in Contemporary Bangkok’ – you can access a PDF version. Might be of some use to you.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
Hai John #8, I would agreed with you except for the fact that the Thais did not get the govt they voted for! The govt they voted for was sacked by the army / juditiary / whoever ? amart? I don’t know
Chulalongkorn abolished prostration
NM is to be congratulated for kicking off a discussion that led to a rare, good editorial being written in the BKK Post.
Optimistic thoughts are rare these days, so let me just say that ten years ago anything resembling the following paragraph would have never made it into any Thai newspaper:
“The unfairness of the lese majeste law is that anyone can file a complaint and there are no guidelines as to the interpretation of the law. What did the people charged by the military actually say to earn them the charge? The media is not allowed to let us know. Is it considered lese majeste to advocate the abolishment of the lese majeste law, or to criticise institutions under royal patronage? No one knows the boundaries of interpretation.”
Let’s celebrate what progress we have.
Don’t let animals into parliament!
Samip – I think we agree. That is exactly the point I was making. AW
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
I see Phue Thai is offering an executive amnesty decree if they win. Everything done since 2006 will be forgiven. From the Post we have this quote from a well known supporter of democracy.
Although the PAD had earlier voiced its opposition to an amnesty law it would likely agree with the Pheu Thai’s amnesty decree now that its leaders are facing terrorism charges for blocking two Bangkok airports in 2008, Mr. Chalerm said.
I wonder if that’s true. I always suspected that among the PAD there were quite a few willing to be martyrs so it could well be wrong and we could see the yellow shirts in the streets again.
Of course the local press will be full of ‘vote Yingluck get Thaksin’ but don’t forget you get Chalerm and a few others too.
Don’t let animals into parliament!
i disagree with New Mandala. i think Pheau Thai Party must be happy with the NO vote campaign coz yellow shirts represents/supports the current military backed Democrat government. no vote campaign will effect more to current government than to opposition.
Chulalongkorn abolished prostration
R. N. England
An absolutely fascinating theory – and perfectly in line with how Thais treat each other even today. I’m afraid egalitarianism will be a long time coming in Thailand (as it was in Europe) regardless of who wins what election over the next generation of two. All pretence at democracy will be a sham until all Thais intuitively feel and believe each other to be on an equal footing (excuse the pun). As it stands, some academics still infer that the majority of the population are a “non-mainstream sub-culture.”
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
Sure, there’s an Hegelian dialect being played out and the only aim is for the winner to amass wealth and power but once in a coloured moon the elites and wannabe elite are at war with each other.
The aim is to encourage that inner circle conflict by voting in the unwelcome party and then not participating when both sides are at peace with each other.
Chulalongkorn abolished prostration
New Mandala readers following this story closely will want to see what Political Prisoners in Thailand has to say. All of the details are available here.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
At the end of the day Thai people deserve who they vote for.
No amount of outside discussion will make a difference, as I have often been told as a foreigner I could never understand ‘Thainess’ no matter how much I read or research.
It is not difficult to see what historically has evolved in Thailand yet the Thais themselves accept what in many cases has been forced upon them.
A great man once said ‘Forgive them for they know not what they do.
There is hope as in an age of global communication maybe there will be a way for the misdirected to find the light and actually see what those in power are actually doing to them and finally say enough!
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
Nganadeeleg – 1
I think you shouldnt put up any hope with anyone at this point (yes not Yingluck, not Abhisit). Thailand’s problem is not about who should get the power, but rather, how the country should reform (or revolutionize) itself from the current elite centralized power structure to the one that allows grass root to have more political say in the country’s affair and for to the country be more open and more “democratic”. Certainly neither PT nor DP promote that particular agenda.
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
Nganadeeleg @1, I’m with you. I hated Thaksin because of his hostility to the free press and obvious cronyism, positions I still stand by, but I’ll readily admit that my convictions that he was the “most corrupt ever” was based on ignorance of the Thai par for corruption.
The last five years have been a hard, complex, frustrating but enlightening education in Thai politics. My wife used to idolize the king and marched with the PAD in 2005 — and now she reads Prachathai and is ready to vote PT. Her friends, unfortunately, just cover their ears and drink the yellow Kool-aid.
Like many reasonable Thais I know, I still feel great anxiety that Thaksin’s return will bring the same autocracy/press hostility/cronyism/power consolidation /patronage corruption that we saw from 2002-2006.
But on principle it is preferable to the current autocracy/press hostility/cronyism/power consolidation /patronage corruption of the unelected military and monarchist elite.
To paraphrase Churchill, Thaksin is the worst possible Thai leader, except for all the others.
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
I feel a bit like a spoiler but…(here is my penny worth): it is not a question the positioning of two political actors or even parties in terms of their respective virtues or otherwise…This makes too many assumptions that are not able to be substantiated. The game plan is far more complex that mere personalities, gendered or otherwise. In this piece we risk losing a vision of the forest for the trees. We know that since late 2006 the amaat regime took on a new and aggressive front in order to claw back power once and for all from an emerging inclusive democratic process; [other than sporadic events post Oct 1976…] No, to my mind it is not about political “partying”. It is about summit dominance over culture, economy, politics, [perceived morality] and a desperately lost civil society, all orchestrated by certain military actors close to the palace in a compact with the notoriously corrupt DP Party [as a face of Thai Parliamentary democracy]; the latter which as AW says, has long benefitted from coups to establish a political platform to rule and control resources and roll out personal benefits. Simply put: it matters little who wins at the polls (and assuming it is going to be fair – which it will not) because we know who will not lose: the amaat regime, which will continue its maintain its control by whatever means over government and policy outcomes.
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
Jeez, nothing like a bit of bias and axe-grinding. I thought that New Mandala was supposed to be an academically-oriented site? Where’s the analysis?
We already have access to endless quantities of serial partisan ranting. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, I just think a bit of analysis and some honest debate would be a lot more useful than an additional venue for political team sports.
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
It is purely Thaksin’s billions that gives him appeal and to many of his supporters, legitimacy. It doesn’t matter how this wealth was amassed as many powerful people in the kingdom have gained power through illegal means.
Money politics in Thailand is what perpetuates the divide in the kingdom as it reinforces the archaic and corrupt ‘patronage system’ which Thaksin when in power, fully utilized so as to appear to be a champion of the poor.
What differences his little sister will bring as a leader is anyone’s guess ,yet the power of the families enormous wealth will certainly be taken into account when Thais go to the polls.
Somsak’s open letter to the princess
The article is not blocked for me. Which means it’s being blocked by the ISP, not the MICT directly.
Chulalongkorn abolished prostration
It looks very much as if I have been unclear (27) about what I think is an interesting connection between grovelling (prostration) and the Thai attitude to foot gestures.
In the days before Chulalongkorn abolished slavery and grovelling, a slave was required to grovel, with his face pointed downwards whenever he was in the presence of his master. He was never allowed to look up. It seems to me that in that situation, especially if the slave was from a recently conquered region, and understood only the language/dialect of that region, the master would tend to give his instructions with foot gestures, pointing with a foot where he expected the slave to go, for example.
If I am right about this fairly recent Thai history, to gesture to someone with a foot, even these days, is to treat him like a slave. This seems to me to be a better explanation of why foot gestures are resented than the usual one, that the foot is a low part of the body.
To a certain extent this is common to all cultures. A kick in the arse is the most insulting form of violence, because it was typical of the relations between a master and his grovelling slave.
Finally, the revival of grovelling in the Thai Royal Court, is clearly an attempt to reassert the master-slave relationship between the King and his people. It reflects badly on Bhumibol, especially when we compare him with the much more enlightened, polite, and courageous Chulalongkorn.
Agen DominoQQ Online Paling Populer
A few years ago I’d have agreed that it’s a step back in time. But let’s not forget the unstoppable power of demographics. We’ve had six years of the old guard dying off, six years of the able becoming increasingly disabled, and six glorious years of new blood coming into the game.
Few are privy to who pulls what strings at the elite level, but one thing is for sure.
They’re six years closer to their expiration date.
It’s just a matter of time. Deep down they know they’re clinging on to the past. It’s a losing battle because attachment is suffering.
Chulalongkorn abolished prostration
See Jon Ungpakorn’s commentary here.
Lese embassy!
Tarrin #8
Just wondering, what’s the more complex version of the whole thing? Its not that I think this conflict is simply ammart vs prai like you said, but this is to be the conflict that decided what Thailand will become in the next 30 years or so, so I’m really curious what do you think is the deeper meaning of all these?
That’s a big question which is beyond me, but I can elaborate on my own thoughts anyway. It’s a conflict between two reactionary sets of political opportunists, representing old and new power structures, each deeply anti-democratic. Both appeal to the public in the language of reform, although the capitalists speak it more fluently and seductively.
But beyond polemics, how much substance do we find in their calls to reform? Which side offers a plan for restoring the independence of the judiciary? Which is talking seriously about reforming the police? Who’s standing up for a free press? Who is serious about improving the education system, beyond gimmicks and giveaways? Who is willing to counter the unchecked exploitation of the land and water that so many Thais depend on for a living? Keeping the army in a locker under civilian control? Unfortunately, neither side is–and that’s why we should hope that this isn’t the conflict that will Thailand’s path forward for the next 30 years.
The real agenda for reform in Thai society has been raised not by politicians but civil society, which had something of a heyday in the pre-Thaksin years but has been taking cover ever since. Both reactionary camps resist this public input. Personally, I feel that the capitalists have been more virulent in suppressing civil society. Look at the assassinations of 14 environment activists during Thaksin’s first term. Not to be outdone, once they discovered the power of lese majeste, the royalists have found their own secret weapon to suppress dissent. But at least there’s a law to be fought against. How do you repeal a hitman?
So what is the deeper meaning? Two regressive patronage networks vying against one another to enrich themselves at the expense of the freedom and prosperity of the nation. Let’s hope we don’t have to wait 30 years for an alternative.
News from northeast Thailand
Les,
Google a 2009 PhD thesis entitled ‘Status City: Consumption, Identity, and Middle Class Culture in Contemporary Bangkok’ – you can access a PDF version. Might be of some use to you.