Thailand and Thainess are also cultural constructs. Some of us ARE actually interested in aspects of these artifacts that exist/ed prior to, during and beyond the political.
I am reading that many here seem to be unable to move beyond their own culture subculture as political activists/academics/observers. Is it possible that you can respect other opinions and perceptions without trivialising them please? Or is there only one way to consider Thailand: through a political lense? Don’t you think that underestimates what “Thainess” might be?
If I am a niave inquirer, than I own that – it can be a good thing and is key to learning. I still like to learn….
C11. The Chonburi mafia ran under CTP of Banharn last election and the Dems won every seat against them with PPP coming in third. The Dems won on basically a tidewave of anti-Thaksinism and Banharn wasnt trusted to not form a government with PPP even though he said he would not (He did, so people called that right)
Things are different now. The Dems won on big backing from people oddly enough from the north and Isaan who had become first time home owners (via jobs in industrial estates) in Chonburi and were not linked to the traditional power groups together with their usual middle class backing. At the time Abhisit was seen in this wealthy province as different and clean. That is an image that is tainted. At that time the traditional powers had backing but were also losing some local elections to Dems and alternative kamnan as father to sons handover undermined them. The PPP also had some backing from mostly Chonburi born urban working class and maybe oddly massive backing from small shop house business owners. This was easy enough to see back then and many talked about it locally.
Now the Dems are discredited in terms of being clean, the traditional power group has recovered in local elections and in power groupings as the younger family members establish their own credentials although not to the level of their father in terms of dominance. They have also outlined a not red or yellow stance. Identifying with either colour immediately loses you masses of voters. Plus they have pushed their love Chonburi campaign to include national elections with the new party now. The reds are also far better organised and the PTP has brought into its fold a few powerful locals including an Dem MP on the back of promises. Chonburi will be competetive and the Dems will not hold all the seats this time. Quite how it comes out is not easy to predict as the anti-Abhisit vote could divide and allow in a Dem or the anti-Thaksin vote could divide and allow in a PTP in some or even many constituencies. Last time that the anti-Thaksin vote all went one way was crucial in Chonburi.
Having said all of that and that reds and yellows wont vote for the other colour party as they perceive it, there is little to no antipathy among the people as they easily mix whatever their colour preference and get on with life. that is probably a good thing, which I have also noticed in some Northern areas. It is a shame that those higher up dont emulate the people
I guess we will never know what’s the real number is, but noted that if someone start talking about this in the senior citizen club then the dissent might actually be more real than it is perceived to be.
If I recall correctly, this is not the first estimate. The first estimate ever recorded is probably the one by Phraya Songsuradej at the time of Siamese coup d’état of 1932.
Vast majority of the people didn’t care and there was an even split between anti- and pro-monarchy group. Thus they decided to launch a coup in 1932.
Tarrin first let me say that every single officer (up to the very top) and soldier who knowingly gave the order and carried out the sniper shooting of unarmed protesters should be arrested, tried and jailed. The violent elements of the Red/Black Shirts and their leaders too should be arrested, tried and jailed.
Could you Tarrin really say ‘with certainty’ (Spooner’s term) that none of those shot and arrested (still hundreds of Reds languishing in jail) were/are not Black Shirts.
Perhaps this excerpt from the HRW report (my apologies for the repeat and repost):
” . . . They weren’t really “black” shirts–they were sometimes in green military uniforms and others dressed like Red Shirt protesters. They didn’t have any relationship with the Red Guards, and weren’t interested in dealing with the Red Shirt leaders…. They took their work very seriously. The guys I met, they knew how to move and shoot. They also had experience handling explosives…. The Black Shirts didn’t come to try and take territory–they shoot and then they leave, they hit [the soldiers] and retreat” – Olivier Sarbil, a journalist who spent several days together with a group of armed militants at the Ratchaprasong protest camp, described to Human Rights Watch his experience with the Black Shirts, Bangkok , June 14, 2010
I think the reason why many people are skeptic about this conference was because this particular statement.
This conference will offer the fruits of academic researches to help alleviate the suffering caused by the impact of poor understanding of contemporary Thai state and society.
Yep, all of the chaos and mayhem in Thailand was cause by no other but poor understanding. Maybe you should change that to something more less egoistic.
You also have to admit that Thai society and economic all intertwine with politic so no matter how much you want to expand the topic of discuss it will come to politic one way or another.
“… I think if you took a poll in England and asked the people whether they wanted a monarchy or not, perhaps the [yes] percentage would be about 42%. I’m sure in this country it is still 80% to 90%. And in this 80% or 90% there are some very, very loyal real monarchists or real royalists, perhaps 40-50-60%. The rest don’t see any disadvantages in living under the monarchy. ”
There will not be an all-out ban on the discussion of controversial topics. It will be more subtle. Those organising the conference, those in charge of panels and special invited speakers are those deemed by the Thai military-backed Government to be “safe pairs of hands”. They will act as the necessary filters. Opposition academics and intellectuals will not have the funds to travel to Australia. That will help ensure that their voices are not heard. Many foreign academics who study Thailand will also be fully aware that if they step over the mark and honestly discuss the present situation they will not get their next visas and their joint projects with Thai universities will be terminated. Thai students in Australia who wish to return to Thailand will be too frightened to say what they think, if they oppose the regime. Self-censorship will have a big effect.
This Thai Studies Conference will merely reproduce the atmosphere of censorship and repression which is in place inside Thailand. For it not to be the case, the organisers should have refused sponsorship from the Thai Embassy and the Thai Government right from the start.
I suppose time and the content and quality of the papers delivered will tell.
It’s a pity that the Thai conferences in Australia seem to be either all-Westerners at the ANU, or all-Thais at Melbourne.
I think your conference is potentially a great opportunity. But if it’s to fulfil its potential then it needs to divorce itself from the Thai embassy. At the moment, it’s becoming clear that political discussions are unwelcome. You have sought to dilute the importance of politics by (all of a sudden) broadening the focus of your conference. The natural assumption is that the interests of the Thai embassy are being well served.
It seems that Nattavud Pimpa’s “agenda” is quite clear, to trivialize all of the overwhelming political dimensions that underlie almost everything going on in Thailand at this point in time in favor of more specialized “Thai Science” topics like “Biometric DNA Studies & Linguistic Analysis of Thai Mice”.
BTW, I hope by now that all of this forum’s readers understand that only people who are genetically “Thai” have any hope of understanding in a comprehensive way the behaviour of Thai Mice who are unique, separate and apart from all other mice species in the world.
“I am not interested in pursuing any conversation on Thai politics because this conference is not a Thai politics conference.
IS IT CLEAR?
Thai Studies is much broader than Thai politics and yet we need to pursue ideas on issues such as health, agriculture, architecture, education, biology, business and management from the Thai context.”
Just a short note from me: Perhaps the aforementioned gentleman doesn’t realize that all those “issues” are in Thai context heavily politicized, full of ideological (read: royalist) undertones, commonly censored, with dissenting views obliterated.
No scholarly paper with semblance of credibility can avoid scrutinizing this sorry mess called Thai political culture, be it in health, education or indeed business and management.
My only suggestion to you is if you never submit the paper, you will never know the nature of the conference. A Kind of academic that instilled in me encourages me to pursue this conference to academics from eclectic backgrounds because there are a lot to offer in the domain of Thai studies. If you don’t want to try it, I can’t force you. ok?
To Enrico Demanche,
I would like to dedicate this message to you to.
How many times I have to emphasizes that this conference is not a political sciences conference. Thai studies is much broader than politics and one that focus on it promises a yawnner. My view of the world is much more wholistic than that. I want my circle of friends who are interested in Thailand to know about our pop culture, science, management ideas of SMEs, teaching Thai languages. Perhaps, those who don’t understand the value of research will find it less entertaining than talking to his/her partners or mistress. …which I understand completely.
“This conference will offer the fruits of academic researches to help alleviate the suffering caused by the impact of poor understanding of contemporary Thai state and society.”
I think that perhaps one of the problems people have with the value of this conference is caused by the presumption that the suffering in Thailand is caused by “poor understanding”. Some might think that this is not the problem at all. You clearly indicate that you have a superior understanding to many Thais in this comment “I was a bit sorry that most of Thais do not know what was going on like we do but they were fooled by some distorted truth and they happened to be the majority and of course they can outvote me anytime we call for such vote” and you also indicate that “Thailand is unique” and therefore beyond any understanding.
Finally you state that:
“My intention to promote Thailand and Thainess in the conference is beyond a discussion of political ideology in Thailand in the electronic forum. ”
Thailand is a political entity and Thainess is a political idea and ideology. I quote from your conference website: “Question on “Thai Identity” or “Thainess” and the way it affects social, political and organisational factors remain unanswered in contemporary Thailand.”
I am thinking of submitting a paper to this conference – on politics, English language and “Thainess” . My paper would reject completely the assumptions that you have made here . I hope that this would not disqualify it.
Locally in Chon Buri, the local political family of Kamnan Poh, announced today that they were forming a new Political Party. This after the defeat of all of the MPs that they fielded in the 2007 election.
My impression of this is that they wish to dissassociate themselves from PT and TRT which they were formerly connected with. If this trend occurs throughout Thailand as it has already been done in Buriram and Saraburi, where the local godfather syndicates separate from the mainstream parties, perhaps a third scenario will occur in which PT gets a block of MP say200, the Democrats get A block of 160 and the non-affiliated godfathers get 140. (Approx) Then the true kingmakers become the godfathers and the only way to form a government will be with them calling all the shots.
In this scenerio it is possible that they would even get the PM position in the negotiations that follow.
Granted that there are obvious rivaries as BJT has attempted to muscle into Chonburi and Pattaya in the past 3 years. But they (bosses) may see it to their advantage to develop this third non-affiliated strategy in an attemp to be a major part of the next government.
I dedicate this message to Khun Nattavud Pimpa, to contributors to New Mandala and the ANU-affiliated editors of this site.
In my honest opinion, a conference “exploring critically” the subject matter of Thainess in the contemporary era promises to be a yawner; a real waste of time, money and academic reputation. There is absolutely no sex appeal associated with the topic. More importantly, it is hardly relevant given the fluidity of the current Thai political scene . I will not travel to Oz just to listen to pedantic musings when I can remain in Thailand and experience the vagaries of Thainess first-hand by engaging in a completely nonsensical argument with either my wife (who was a former Yellow Shirt booster) or my mistress (who looks good in a Red Shirt).
With that in mind, I suggest that there be a conference organized that would revolve around a substantive and comprehensive investigation of the events which took place in Thailand from the 10th of April to the 23rd of May. There are still too many questions left unanswered and much information (in print, videos, photos) that requires organization and analysis. It is absolutely astounding that the Thai Studies community has not undertaken a concerted effort to invest itself in such an educational endeavour.
It would be fascinating to listen to eyewitness accounts of the 2010 Red Shirt Revolution and the observations of both academics and non-academics, of Thais and non-Thais alike on a myriad of moments and issues that literally burned a page into the annals of Thai history. The level of in-depth research would be high and the presentations would be geared towards providing the audience with a more complete picture about what happened, who was involved, where, when and why. I strongly feel that the focus of the Thai Studies community should be on coming to grips with the significance of current events on Thailand today, rather than “debating” a concept – Thainess – which is a mere intellectual/behavioural excuse for myopic Thais.
Don’t have the link handy, but two or three weeks ago Thaksin was explicitly saying that Prayuth could stay after Puea Thai took over. You could look it up. No one was listening to him then.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
To Tom Hoy (and others)
Thailand and Thainess are also cultural constructs. Some of us ARE actually interested in aspects of these artifacts that exist/ed prior to, during and beyond the political.
I am reading that many here seem to be unable to move beyond their own culture subculture as political activists/academics/observers. Is it possible that you can respect other opinions and perceptions without trivialising them please? Or is there only one way to consider Thailand: through a political lense? Don’t you think that underestimates what “Thainess” might be?
If I am a niave inquirer, than I own that – it can be a good thing and is key to learning. I still like to learn….
Speculation on Thai election outcomes
C11. The Chonburi mafia ran under CTP of Banharn last election and the Dems won every seat against them with PPP coming in third. The Dems won on basically a tidewave of anti-Thaksinism and Banharn wasnt trusted to not form a government with PPP even though he said he would not (He did, so people called that right)
Things are different now. The Dems won on big backing from people oddly enough from the north and Isaan who had become first time home owners (via jobs in industrial estates) in Chonburi and were not linked to the traditional power groups together with their usual middle class backing. At the time Abhisit was seen in this wealthy province as different and clean. That is an image that is tainted. At that time the traditional powers had backing but were also losing some local elections to Dems and alternative kamnan as father to sons handover undermined them. The PPP also had some backing from mostly Chonburi born urban working class and maybe oddly massive backing from small shop house business owners. This was easy enough to see back then and many talked about it locally.
Now the Dems are discredited in terms of being clean, the traditional power group has recovered in local elections and in power groupings as the younger family members establish their own credentials although not to the level of their father in terms of dominance. They have also outlined a not red or yellow stance. Identifying with either colour immediately loses you masses of voters. Plus they have pushed their love Chonburi campaign to include national elections with the new party now. The reds are also far better organised and the PTP has brought into its fold a few powerful locals including an Dem MP on the back of promises. Chonburi will be competetive and the Dems will not hold all the seats this time. Quite how it comes out is not easy to predict as the anti-Abhisit vote could divide and allow in a Dem or the anti-Thaksin vote could divide and allow in a PTP in some or even many constituencies. Last time that the anti-Thaksin vote all went one way was crucial in Chonburi.
Having said all of that and that reds and yellows wont vote for the other colour party as they perceive it, there is little to no antipathy among the people as they easily mix whatever their colour preference and get on with life. that is probably a good thing, which I have also noticed in some Northern areas. It is a shame that those higher up dont emulate the people
2 per cent don’t love monarchy
I guess we will never know what’s the real number is, but noted that if someone start talking about this in the senior citizen club then the dissent might actually be more real than it is perceived to be.
2 per cent don’t love monarchy
If I recall correctly, this is not the first estimate. The first estimate ever recorded is probably the one by Phraya Songsuradej at the time of Siamese coup d’état of 1932.
Vast majority of the people didn’t care and there was an even split between anti- and pro-monarchy group. Thus they decided to launch a coup in 1932.
Amnesty International and Robert Amsterdam
Tarrin first let me say that every single officer (up to the very top) and soldier who knowingly gave the order and carried out the sniper shooting of unarmed protesters should be arrested, tried and jailed. The violent elements of the Red/Black Shirts and their leaders too should be arrested, tried and jailed.
Could you Tarrin really say ‘with certainty’ (Spooner’s term) that none of those shot and arrested (still hundreds of Reds languishing in jail) were/are not Black Shirts.
Perhaps this excerpt from the HRW report (my apologies for the repeat and repost):
” . . . They weren’t really “black” shirts–they were sometimes in green military uniforms and others dressed like Red Shirt protesters. They didn’t have any relationship with the Red Guards, and weren’t interested in dealing with the Red Shirt leaders…. They took their work very seriously. The guys I met, they knew how to move and shoot. They also had experience handling explosives…. The Black Shirts didn’t come to try and take territory–they shoot and then they leave, they hit [the soldiers] and retreat” – Olivier Sarbil, a journalist who spent several days together with a group of armed militants at the Ratchaprasong protest camp, described to Human Rights Watch his experience with the Black Shirts, Bangkok , June 14, 2010
Speculation on Thai election outcomes
An Observer #11, you forgot the party list MPs.
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
Nattavud Pimpa
I think the reason why many people are skeptic about this conference was because this particular statement.
This conference will offer the fruits of academic researches to help alleviate the suffering caused by the impact of poor understanding of contemporary Thai state and society.
Yep, all of the chaos and mayhem in Thailand was cause by no other but poor understanding. Maybe you should change that to something more less egoistic.
You also have to admit that Thai society and economic all intertwine with politic so no matter how much you want to expand the topic of discuss it will come to politic one way or another.
Amnesty International and Robert Amsterdam
VichaiN – 91
We get those black shirt record already, you dont need to repeat it, but our question was “why not a single black shirt is found dead or arrest?”
2 per cent don’t love monarchy
Anand Panyarachun to Asia Online
“… I think if you took a poll in England and asked the people whether they wanted a monarchy or not, perhaps the [yes] percentage would be about 42%. I’m sure in this country it is still 80% to 90%. And in this 80% or 90% there are some very, very loyal real monarchists or real royalists, perhaps 40-50-60%. The rest don’t see any disadvantages in living under the monarchy. ”
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/LC24Ae02.html
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
The opinion of Giles Ungpakorn :
Thai Studies Conference in Melbourne: attempt to white wash the regime?
I suppose time and the content and quality of the papers delivered will tell.
It’s a pity that the Thai conferences in Australia seem to be either all-Westerners at the ANU, or all-Thais at Melbourne.
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
Readers on this blog may also want to check out Ji Ungpakorn’s “Thai Studies Conference in Melbourne: attempt to white wash the regime?” (Sunday 8 May, 11)
http://redthaisocialist.com/english-article/35-thai-monarchy/191-thai-studies-conference-in-melbourne-attempt-to-white-wash-the-regime-.html
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
Nattavud pimpa
I think your conference is potentially a great opportunity. But if it’s to fulfil its potential then it needs to divorce itself from the Thai embassy. At the moment, it’s becoming clear that political discussions are unwelcome. You have sought to dilute the importance of politics by (all of a sudden) broadening the focus of your conference. The natural assumption is that the interests of the Thai embassy are being well served.
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
It seems that Nattavud Pimpa’s “agenda” is quite clear, to trivialize all of the overwhelming political dimensions that underlie almost everything going on in Thailand at this point in time in favor of more specialized “Thai Science” topics like “Biometric DNA Studies & Linguistic Analysis of Thai Mice”.
BTW, I hope by now that all of this forum’s readers understand that only people who are genetically “Thai” have any hope of understanding in a comprehensive way the behaviour of Thai Mice who are unique, separate and apart from all other mice species in the world.
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
“nattavud pimpa” writes:
“I am not interested in pursuing any conversation on Thai politics because this conference is not a Thai politics conference.
IS IT CLEAR?
Thai Studies is much broader than Thai politics and yet we need to pursue ideas on issues such as health, agriculture, architecture, education, biology, business and management from the Thai context.”
Just a short note from me: Perhaps the aforementioned gentleman doesn’t realize that all those “issues” are in Thai context heavily politicized, full of ideological (read: royalist) undertones, commonly censored, with dissenting views obliterated.
No scholarly paper with semblance of credibility can avoid scrutinizing this sorry mess called Thai political culture, be it in health, education or indeed business and management.
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
Billyd,
Likewise, it is very entertaining to read your comments too.
I also wish to see you at the conference.
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
To Tom boy,
My only suggestion to you is if you never submit the paper, you will never know the nature of the conference. A Kind of academic that instilled in me encourages me to pursue this conference to academics from eclectic backgrounds because there are a lot to offer in the domain of Thai studies. If you don’t want to try it, I can’t force you. ok?
To Enrico Demanche,
I would like to dedicate this message to you to.
How many times I have to emphasizes that this conference is not a political sciences conference. Thai studies is much broader than politics and one that focus on it promises a yawnner. My view of the world is much more wholistic than that. I want my circle of friends who are interested in Thailand to know about our pop culture, science, management ideas of SMEs, teaching Thai languages. Perhaps, those who don’t understand the value of research will find it less entertaining than talking to his/her partners or mistress. …which I understand completely.
I am so glad to read your views.
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
Dear Nattawud
“This conference will offer the fruits of academic researches to help alleviate the suffering caused by the impact of poor understanding of contemporary Thai state and society.”
I think that perhaps one of the problems people have with the value of this conference is caused by the presumption that the suffering in Thailand is caused by “poor understanding”. Some might think that this is not the problem at all. You clearly indicate that you have a superior understanding to many Thais in this comment “I was a bit sorry that most of Thais do not know what was going on like we do but they were fooled by some distorted truth and they happened to be the majority and of course they can outvote me anytime we call for such vote” and you also indicate that “Thailand is unique” and therefore beyond any understanding.
Finally you state that:
“My intention to promote Thailand and Thainess in the conference is beyond a discussion of political ideology in Thailand in the electronic forum. ”
Thailand is a political entity and Thainess is a political idea and ideology. I quote from your conference website: “Question on “Thai Identity” or “Thainess” and the way it affects social, political and organisational factors remain unanswered in contemporary Thailand.”
I am thinking of submitting a paper to this conference – on politics, English language and “Thainess” . My paper would reject completely the assumptions that you have made here . I hope that this would not disqualify it.
Speculation on Thai election outcomes
Locally in Chon Buri, the local political family of Kamnan Poh, announced today that they were forming a new Political Party. This after the defeat of all of the MPs that they fielded in the 2007 election.
My impression of this is that they wish to dissassociate themselves from PT and TRT which they were formerly connected with. If this trend occurs throughout Thailand as it has already been done in Buriram and Saraburi, where the local godfather syndicates separate from the mainstream parties, perhaps a third scenario will occur in which PT gets a block of MP say200, the Democrats get A block of 160 and the non-affiliated godfathers get 140. (Approx) Then the true kingmakers become the godfathers and the only way to form a government will be with them calling all the shots.
In this scenerio it is possible that they would even get the PM position in the negotiations that follow.
Granted that there are obvious rivaries as BJT has attempted to muscle into Chonburi and Pattaya in the past 3 years. But they (bosses) may see it to their advantage to develop this third non-affiliated strategy in an attemp to be a major part of the next government.
Thai Studies conference in Melbourne
I dedicate this message to Khun Nattavud Pimpa, to contributors to New Mandala and the ANU-affiliated editors of this site.
In my honest opinion, a conference “exploring critically” the subject matter of Thainess in the contemporary era promises to be a yawner; a real waste of time, money and academic reputation. There is absolutely no sex appeal associated with the topic. More importantly, it is hardly relevant given the fluidity of the current Thai political scene . I will not travel to Oz just to listen to pedantic musings when I can remain in Thailand and experience the vagaries of Thainess first-hand by engaging in a completely nonsensical argument with either my wife (who was a former Yellow Shirt booster) or my mistress (who looks good in a Red Shirt).
With that in mind, I suggest that there be a conference organized that would revolve around a substantive and comprehensive investigation of the events which took place in Thailand from the 10th of April to the 23rd of May. There are still too many questions left unanswered and much information (in print, videos, photos) that requires organization and analysis. It is absolutely astounding that the Thai Studies community has not undertaken a concerted effort to invest itself in such an educational endeavour.
It would be fascinating to listen to eyewitness accounts of the 2010 Red Shirt Revolution and the observations of both academics and non-academics, of Thais and non-Thais alike on a myriad of moments and issues that literally burned a page into the annals of Thai history. The level of in-depth research would be high and the presentations would be geared towards providing the audience with a more complete picture about what happened, who was involved, where, when and why. I strongly feel that the focus of the Thai Studies community should be on coming to grips with the significance of current events on Thailand today, rather than “debating” a concept – Thainess – which is a mere intellectual/behavioural excuse for myopic Thais.
What say you?
Speculation on Thai election outcomes
I think you’re on to something there, Robin.
The Coming Election: Who will be elected by Isan People
A more negative campaign for the Army than Prayuth’s?
ABAC explains why Prayuth has ‘no reason not to accept it’
Don’t have the link handy, but two or three weeks ago Thaksin was explicitly saying that Prayuth could stay after Puea Thai took over. You could look it up. No one was listening to him then.