Please reread the “contrived” line in question. What I wrote was not that Sombat’s leadership is “contrived”, but rather that putting the UDD’s disparate groups under one coherent “pro-democracy” banner is “contrived”. I still have a hard time reconciling the “black shirts”, Seh Daeng and Panlop Pinmanee with a pro-democracy movement.
I personally find Sombat a much more compelling figure to lead a pro-democracy charge than the previous cast of UDD leaders. When I spoke with him on Sunday, he acknowledged leading Sunday’s “red shirt people”, which to date has generally been synonymous with the UDD.
But there are still many unanswered questions about his emergence, which I tried to raise in my story. Its very interesting that the UDD were keen to play up the notion that Sunday’s rally was attended mainly by the Bangkok middle class, of which Sombat is self-admittedly part and parcel.
Please also reread the “carrot and stick” line, which makes a suggestion rather than assertion. I wrote that in the context of ongoing behind-the-scenes negotiations between Thaksin and the government that:
“The UDD’s show of popular force on Sunday could thus be interpreted as Thaksin’s latest carrot and stick bid to enhance his negotiating leverage vis-a-vis the government.”
Did Thaksin definitely play a role in Sunday’s protest? Nobody can be certain without bank statements or phone transcripts. Note my story also clearly quotes UDD supporters saying Thaksin played no role, hedged with diplomats who believe he did. My story presented both views.
I find it interesting that so little critical or academic attention has been paid to the very active behind-the-scenes negotiations and the personal demands Thaksin allegedly makes during these on-off talks. I personally don’t think any coherent analysis of the conflict can divorce what is happening in these talks with what happens on the streets.
I admittedly differ with most Red Mandala readers and posters in that I view Thailand’s conflict as one between elites jockeying for position ahead of the succession, and believe that the very legitimate grass roots grievances have been galvanized for Thaksin’s and UDD leader’s particularistic purposes.
It’s interesting that the UDD Chiang Mai protest included for the first time a list of four coherent policy demands, a notably break from the one-dimensional rally cry for a dissolution of parliament. This would seemingly be a reaction to the criticisms of the UDD’s recent rallies where leaders speeches consisted more of hate speech than social reforms suggestion.
To be sure, some believe Thaksin has let the proverbial genie out of the bottle and that the UDD has taken on an organic live of its own. But recognizing the symbolic and organizational role Thaksin has played in the very recent past, i.e. March, my journalistic instinct is to remain skeptical of claims that he is now merely an innocent bystander.
Lily: I walked through the protest with Sean Boonracong for over an hour on Sunday. There were parts of our conversation that were on-the-record and other parts off – which, as always, I respected.
Sean gave interviews to several media members that day. He also distributed propaganda fliers which he was involved in producing under the heading “Ratchaprasong News”, of which I have a copy. He was very much acting as a spokesman.
After sheltering together under a tent against the rain, we proceeded to the McDonalds where we met with you and others and continued our discussions. Sean was also distributing propaganda fliers, which he helped produce, under the heading “Ratchaprasong News”.
Sean also told Bloomberg reporter Daniel Ten Kate that Sombat represented a “new generation” of UDD leaders. With Sunday’s clear re-emergence on the streets, how can it be that the UDD no longer exists?
True dat. Also the patron saint of men who dream of having a hundred minor wives and three hundred children. :>
It’s notable that Rama V is credited with saving Siam by forcibly modernizing it, by which he willfully eliminated numerous aspects of established Siamese “culture” (dress, deportment, etc).
Apparently if anyone less than a king tries to modernize the country, he’s being “un-Thai.” Which leaves it up to the king to set the tone for progress. How will history judge Rama 9, when the dust settles? We probably won’t know in our lifetimes.
Yes, the BACC is under the BMA, which is a Bangkok-province administration under the Democrats. Hardly ideal. But having met some of the lower people in charge of curating, I find hopeful signs that the BACC is basically being left alone.
Let’s not forget that the highest Dem in the BMA is Sukhumband, the most vocally progressive and a frequent breaker of ranks with the Abhisit line. (As well as a veiled target for childish red smears about the government being full of homosexuals.)
I believe the words Doh Bama is the short for Ngar-Doh-Bama which only means We Burmans. A narrowly nationalistic name for an extreme-nationalistic organization.
Moe Aung,
Burma is the only second and the last country to gain complete independence from Britain after the American colonies gained their complete independence from Britain.
All other former British colonies has chosen to be British dominions within the British Commonwealth.
It is a bit premature to explain it now as my Limbo Part 4 will detail the fights inside AFPFL for whether to ask the Dominion status or Complete independence from the British.
What all the conservatives and the independents inside AFPFL wanted was just a Dominion status like Australia, Canada, and South Africa while the hardline leftists wanted complete independence. Aung San clearly was on the fence and finally Communists and Socialists together managed to pull him down and over to their side.
We Burmese made a serious mistake back then and Aung San soon realised that too but it was too late. And we are now collectively paying heavily for that mistake.
Even here in peaceful and prosperous Australia the leftwing nationalists and socialists are continuously fighting to transform Australia into a republic instead of current British dominion status. But majority Australians rejected that proposal in the last referendum for republic.
They decisively wanted to continue being British subjects than ruled by some socialist president. How smart Aussies are compared to us Burmese.
The red shirt rally on sunday was largely organic and spontaneous as people were largely mobilized through informal social networks and the new media. It would be false to underestimate how heterogeneous the red shirt supporters are. The most interesting parts of Sombat’s approach to promoting voice and participation in a shrinking democratic space in Thailand are the use of symbols for peaceful resistance as well as the emphasis on bottom-up mobilization driven by the real people at the grassroots level to learn how to lead themselves (and demand for their equal civil and political rights) as opposed to replying on any core leaders. This means more organic red shirt movements led by small different groups will have to happen spontaneously in different places.
I certainly agree on the interesting parts. I am much more optimistic after seeing the numbers on Sunday and the spontaneity of the demonstration.
Yes I agree with you on your opinion on Sombat and I think the author might not intrepid what Sombat was saying correctly. I was there on Sunday as well around 4 till 6. I saw everything and I have to give Sombat a huge credit on keeping the momentum going but I also believed that Sombat himself didn’t expect so much people to turn up so he didn’t have a proper plan in mind. Furthermore, I believe he didn’t want the local media to attack the Red as a law abide barbarian like usual so he was trying to get everything under control. Fortunately, as the police was looking for leader to negotiate with and they found no one who can be clearly called “leader” even Sombat himself so the police had to let the red took over the intersection out of necessity.
The title of this thread: “The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism”.
But further to my poster (#1), in case nobody gets it yet, if the Reds are impotent of creativity (no Red poetry or songs or Red artistic expressions of any sort), to mold their anger, hopes or pain into ‘art and symbols’ . . . where to draw out the power or inspiration . . . to stop authoritarianism (imagined or real)?
Thank you, Hla Oo. However, my question is not about the dispute over, or difference between, Burma/Myanmar as the name of the country, either historically or after the 1989 change. Rather, it is with how historians writing in English should translate the word bamar as it was used during the colonial period. You have translated Doh-bamar Asi-a-yone as “We Burman Association”. Yet, this is only one of multiple possibilities. In the foreward to Daw Khin Yi’s book Robert Taylor wrote (p. ix-x) the following:
The attempts by European writers to refer to the Dobama Asiayone by its initials failed but not before causing a good deals of confusion. In older writings the organization is usually referred to as the DAA. British police records followed this practice. The use of these initials reveals a confusion about the Burmese spelling of the name. Do stands alone signifying “We” but it often written and pronounced in the possessive form Do and then means “Our.” Bama means either “Burman,” “Burmese,” or “Burma,” thus Do Bama can be either the more narrowly nationalistic “We Burmans,” the broader “We Burmese,” or the most encompassing “Our Burma.”
In her book, Daw Khin Yi also translates it, like you, as “We Burman Association.” However, whereas Robert Taylor writes that “Burmese” (multi-ethnic?) is a broader term than “Burman” (mono-ethnic?), she equates the two: “The terms Burman and Burmese are both used to denote all the indigenous races of Burma with no reference to any particular ethnic group” (p.1).
I only wanted to raise an observation about the trickiness of translating this ambiguous word, not about the politics or etymology of the 1989 name change.
Seriously Hla Oo wants to go easy on playing fast and loose with facts.
Of the staggering statistics seemingly off the top of his head: King Mindon himself died peacefully in 1878. Although leaving over one hundred children by numerous wives and concubines, he too failed to secure the succession.
Fourteen brothers and four sisters, together with sixty-one other relatives, met their deaths over a four-day period in February 1879.
(http://www.royalark.net/Burma/burma.htm)
The rebel princes Myingun and Myingundaing were not the eldest sons. Malun, Badain and Thonze were older.
Aung San’s 200,000 strong militia is rather a fantastic figure in a population then of around 20 million. Even the Tatmadaw today can only boast 400,000.
Aung San had started Burma’s road to ruin by outmaneuvering the British and eventually forcing them out off Burma and placing the leftwing nationalists on the Peacock Throne of Burma.
Is Hla Oo seriously saying we should never have kicked the British out? Instead we should have accepted what they thought was best for us, and cooperated under their expert governance like the older politicians Dr Ba Maw and U Saw? Guided and mentored by the arch capitalist imperialist state to prosperity that Hla Oo , now a card carrying member of the bourgeoisie, recommends . By the same logic we shouldn’t be thinking of kicking out Than Shwe and his outfit either. Evolution, not revolution.
The British did succeed in getting both Aung San and Than Tun out of the picture by proxy, and were left to deal with U Nu and Kyaw Nyein. Ne Win did the rest and his protégé Than Shwe has carried on the ‘good work’. The colonialists did what they always did – the partition of India, the Malayan Emergency etc. ; you underestimate them at your peril. No, they did not want any left wing government anywhere in the world. And they still don’t.
Hla Oo in his old age has gone revisionist in more ways than one.
Yes, Dobama was an encompassing term as a nation and can mean both We Burmans and We Burmese regarded as a unified entity (racial purity was not in consideration here), but I can’t think of any ethnic minority Thakin off hand, only Thakin Ba Tin (Goshal), a Bengali, and Burmese Chinese Thakin Ba Thein Tin from Mergui (Myeik or Beik). Many of the Thakins were of mixed ancestry of course, but I can’t think of any pure ethnic Thakin. Perhaps Hla Oo might.
The word Burman was coined by the British though, not by the army. And it was used to distinguish the ethnic group from the rest.
Whilst I agree with Hla Oo that Bama replaced by Myanmar in a song sucks, I beg to differ when he says Burmese also tend to pronounce every word harsh and sharp, and I honestly believe it is our racial character as a proud martial race. Even Japanese can be soft spoken, depends how anyone delivers it. He can speak for himself but unfortunately he is in the habit of making sweeping generalisations.
I went to observe the red shirt rally last Sunday and was impressed by the strong vigor and enthusiasm of the people. They were fearless. With my bare naked eyes, I estimated around 20,000-30,000 people joining the rally. I think the report above is pretty accurate in terms of the sentiment of the people. But it is rather ill-informed and misleading when it comes to the role of Sombat Boon-Ngam-Anong in this regard. I am not sure if the translation of Sombat’s announcement was correct since I heard completely different messages and tone. Sombat has repeatedly made a clear stance that he is not trying to establish himself as one of the core leaders within the UDD. In my view, he is untainted by any personal or political agenda of Thaksin and therefore could potentially bring a genuinely fresh and positive force to the red shirts, including extensive support from progressive intellectuals, social activists and liberal forces to peaceful social movements. Unfortunately, he has no intention to lead the crowd in the traditional way that UDD leaders used to preach and failed in the past. The red shirt rally on sunday was largely organic and spontaneous as people were largely mobilized through informal social networks and the new media. It would be false to underestimate how heterogeneous the red shirt supporters are. The most interesting parts of Sombat’s approach to promoting voice and participation in a shrinking democratic space in Thailand are the use of symbols for peaceful resistance as well as the emphasis on bottom-up mobilization driven by the real people at the grassroots level to learn how to lead themselves (and demand for their equal civil and political rights) as opposed to replying on any core leaders. This means more organic red shirt movements led by small different groups will have to happen spontaneously in different places. In the long run, the Thais will have to get over the old mentality, the hope for a white knight to save our day, as well as the preoccupation over Thaksin and his successors. Only the people and their strong strong conviction in the possibility of a fairer and more just society will lead us to a necessary structural reform, which allows for more sustainable democratization process in Thailand. That seems like a farfetched dream at least in the short run.
WLH #1 :
re : “Rama V before exams, as he is the informal patron saint of education. Perhaps social progressives, activists, and would-be statesmen could make offerings to Pridi?”.
Yes – I agree. But bear in mind – that to millions of “Thais”/Siamese, including millions of Red Shirt sympathisers – Rama V, Chulalongkorn, is THE patron saint of social progressives, activists, and true statesmen, Pridi included.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thai elections in 2010, or 2011, or 2012, or 2013, or 2014, or 2015, or 2016, or 2017, or 2018, or ….
Hi James: Thanks for the question.
Please reread the “contrived” line in question. What I wrote was not that Sombat’s leadership is “contrived”, but rather that putting the UDD’s disparate groups under one coherent “pro-democracy” banner is “contrived”. I still have a hard time reconciling the “black shirts”, Seh Daeng and Panlop Pinmanee with a pro-democracy movement.
I personally find Sombat a much more compelling figure to lead a pro-democracy charge than the previous cast of UDD leaders. When I spoke with him on Sunday, he acknowledged leading Sunday’s “red shirt people”, which to date has generally been synonymous with the UDD.
But there are still many unanswered questions about his emergence, which I tried to raise in my story. Its very interesting that the UDD were keen to play up the notion that Sunday’s rally was attended mainly by the Bangkok middle class, of which Sombat is self-admittedly part and parcel.
Please also reread the “carrot and stick” line, which makes a suggestion rather than assertion. I wrote that in the context of ongoing behind-the-scenes negotiations between Thaksin and the government that:
“The UDD’s show of popular force on Sunday could thus be interpreted as Thaksin’s latest carrot and stick bid to enhance his negotiating leverage vis-a-vis the government.”
Did Thaksin definitely play a role in Sunday’s protest? Nobody can be certain without bank statements or phone transcripts. Note my story also clearly quotes UDD supporters saying Thaksin played no role, hedged with diplomats who believe he did. My story presented both views.
I find it interesting that so little critical or academic attention has been paid to the very active behind-the-scenes negotiations and the personal demands Thaksin allegedly makes during these on-off talks. I personally don’t think any coherent analysis of the conflict can divorce what is happening in these talks with what happens on the streets.
I admittedly differ with most Red Mandala readers and posters in that I view Thailand’s conflict as one between elites jockeying for position ahead of the succession, and believe that the very legitimate grass roots grievances have been galvanized for Thaksin’s and UDD leader’s particularistic purposes.
It’s interesting that the UDD Chiang Mai protest included for the first time a list of four coherent policy demands, a notably break from the one-dimensional rally cry for a dissolution of parliament. This would seemingly be a reaction to the criticisms of the UDD’s recent rallies where leaders speeches consisted more of hate speech than social reforms suggestion.
To be sure, some believe Thaksin has let the proverbial genie out of the bottle and that the UDD has taken on an organic live of its own. But recognizing the symbolic and organizational role Thaksin has played in the very recent past, i.e. March, my journalistic instinct is to remain skeptical of claims that he is now merely an innocent bystander.
The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism
John, I haven’t posted them anywhere yet. They just went from my camera to My Pictures.
Thai elections in 2010, or 2011, or 2012, or 2013, or 2014, or 2015, or 2016, or 2017, or 2018, or ….
Lily: I walked through the protest with Sean Boonracong for over an hour on Sunday. There were parts of our conversation that were on-the-record and other parts off – which, as always, I respected.
Sean gave interviews to several media members that day. He also distributed propaganda fliers which he was involved in producing under the heading “Ratchaprasong News”, of which I have a copy. He was very much acting as a spokesman.
After sheltering together under a tent against the rain, we proceeded to the McDonalds where we met with you and others and continued our discussions. Sean was also distributing propaganda fliers, which he helped produce, under the heading “Ratchaprasong News”.
Sean also told Bloomberg reporter Daniel Ten Kate that Sombat represented a “new generation” of UDD leaders. With Sunday’s clear re-emergence on the streets, how can it be that the UDD no longer exists?
Sulak on Buddhism and the red shirts
chris beale #3:
True dat. Also the patron saint of men who dream of having a hundred minor wives and three hundred children. :>
It’s notable that Rama V is credited with saving Siam by forcibly modernizing it, by which he willfully eliminated numerous aspects of established Siamese “culture” (dress, deportment, etc).
Apparently if anyone less than a king tries to modernize the country, he’s being “un-Thai.” Which leaves it up to the king to set the tone for progress. How will history judge Rama 9, when the dust settles? We probably won’t know in our lifetimes.
The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism
Sopranz#6:
Yes, the BACC is under the BMA, which is a Bangkok-province administration under the Democrats. Hardly ideal. But having met some of the lower people in charge of curating, I find hopeful signs that the BACC is basically being left alone.
Let’s not forget that the highest Dem in the BMA is Sukhumband, the most vocally progressive and a frequent breaker of ranks with the Abhisit line. (As well as a veiled target for childish red smears about the government being full of homosexuals.)
Burma in Limbo, Part 3
Stephen,
I believe the words Doh Bama is the short for Ngar-Doh-Bama which only means We Burmans. A narrowly nationalistic name for an extreme-nationalistic organization.
Moe Aung,
Burma is the only second and the last country to gain complete independence from Britain after the American colonies gained their complete independence from Britain.
All other former British colonies has chosen to be British dominions within the British Commonwealth.
It is a bit premature to explain it now as my Limbo Part 4 will detail the fights inside AFPFL for whether to ask the Dominion status or Complete independence from the British.
What all the conservatives and the independents inside AFPFL wanted was just a Dominion status like Australia, Canada, and South Africa while the hardline leftists wanted complete independence. Aung San clearly was on the fence and finally Communists and Socialists together managed to pull him down and over to their side.
We Burmese made a serious mistake back then and Aung San soon realised that too but it was too late. And we are now collectively paying heavily for that mistake.
Even here in peaceful and prosperous Australia the leftwing nationalists and socialists are continuously fighting to transform Australia into a republic instead of current British dominion status. But majority Australians rejected that proposal in the last referendum for republic.
They decisively wanted to continue being British subjects than ruled by some socialist president. How smart Aussies are compared to us Burmese.
The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism
MattB “if the Reds are impotent of creativity”
See Tom Hoy’s post above. Clearly they’re not, it’s just that you have to leave the bunker to notice them.
Scenes from red Sunday
The red shirt rally on sunday was largely organic and spontaneous as people were largely mobilized through informal social networks and the new media. It would be false to underestimate how heterogeneous the red shirt supporters are. The most interesting parts of Sombat’s approach to promoting voice and participation in a shrinking democratic space in Thailand are the use of symbols for peaceful resistance as well as the emphasis on bottom-up mobilization driven by the real people at the grassroots level to learn how to lead themselves (and demand for their equal civil and political rights) as opposed to replying on any core leaders. This means more organic red shirt movements led by small different groups will have to happen spontaneously in different places.
I certainly agree on the interesting parts. I am much more optimistic after seeing the numbers on Sunday and the spontaneity of the demonstration.
The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism
I have a couple of pictures of this transformed monument to preserve this memory.
Where do you display them?
Scenes from red Sunday
Tonkhao – 1
Yes I agree with you on your opinion on Sombat and I think the author might not intrepid what Sombat was saying correctly. I was there on Sunday as well around 4 till 6. I saw everything and I have to give Sombat a huge credit on keeping the momentum going but I also believed that Sombat himself didn’t expect so much people to turn up so he didn’t have a proper plan in mind. Furthermore, I believe he didn’t want the local media to attack the Red as a law abide barbarian like usual so he was trying to get everything under control. Fortunately, as the police was looking for leader to negotiate with and they found no one who can be clearly called “leader” even Sombat himself so the police had to let the red took over the intersection out of necessity.
The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism
The title of this thread: “The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism”.
But further to my poster (#1), in case nobody gets it yet, if the Reds are impotent of creativity (no Red poetry or songs or Red artistic expressions of any sort), to mold their anger, hopes or pain into ‘art and symbols’ . . . where to draw out the power or inspiration . . . to stop authoritarianism (imagined or real)?
Burma in Limbo, Part 3
Thank you, Hla Oo. However, my question is not about the dispute over, or difference between, Burma/Myanmar as the name of the country, either historically or after the 1989 change. Rather, it is with how historians writing in English should translate the word bamar as it was used during the colonial period. You have translated Doh-bamar Asi-a-yone as “We Burman Association”. Yet, this is only one of multiple possibilities. In the foreward to Daw Khin Yi’s book Robert Taylor wrote (p. ix-x) the following:
In her book, Daw Khin Yi also translates it, like you, as “We Burman Association.” However, whereas Robert Taylor writes that “Burmese” (multi-ethnic?) is a broader term than “Burman” (mono-ethnic?), she equates the two: “The terms Burman and Burmese are both used to denote all the indigenous races of Burma with no reference to any particular ethnic group” (p.1).
I only wanted to raise an observation about the trickiness of translating this ambiguous word, not about the politics or etymology of the 1989 name change.
Burma in Limbo, Part 3
Seriously Hla Oo wants to go easy on playing fast and loose with facts.
Of the staggering statistics seemingly off the top of his head:
King Mindon himself died peacefully in 1878. Although leaving over one hundred children by numerous wives and concubines, he too failed to secure the succession.
Fourteen brothers and four sisters, together with sixty-one other relatives, met their deaths over a four-day period in February 1879.
(http://www.royalark.net/Burma/burma.htm)
The rebel princes Myingun and Myingundaing were not the eldest sons. Malun, Badain and Thonze were older.
Aung San’s 200,000 strong militia is rather a fantastic figure in a population then of around 20 million. Even the Tatmadaw today can only boast 400,000.
Aung San had started Burma’s road to ruin by outmaneuvering the British and eventually forcing them out off Burma and placing the leftwing nationalists on the Peacock Throne of Burma.
Is Hla Oo seriously saying we should never have kicked the British out? Instead we should have accepted what they thought was best for us, and cooperated under their expert governance like the older politicians Dr Ba Maw and U Saw? Guided and mentored by the arch capitalist imperialist state to prosperity that Hla Oo , now a card carrying member of the bourgeoisie, recommends . By the same logic we shouldn’t be thinking of kicking out Than Shwe and his outfit either. Evolution, not revolution.
The British did succeed in getting both Aung San and Than Tun out of the picture by proxy, and were left to deal with U Nu and Kyaw Nyein. Ne Win did the rest and his protégé Than Shwe has carried on the ‘good work’. The colonialists did what they always did – the partition of India, the Malayan Emergency etc. ; you underestimate them at your peril. No, they did not want any left wing government anywhere in the world. And they still don’t.
Hla Oo in his old age has gone revisionist in more ways than one.
The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism
Chris: You my be right, but art is meaningless to those with closed minds.
Burma in Limbo, Part 3
Stephen
Yes, Dobama was an encompassing term as a nation and can mean both We Burmans and We Burmese regarded as a unified entity (racial purity was not in consideration here), but I can’t think of any ethnic minority Thakin off hand, only Thakin Ba Tin (Goshal), a Bengali, and Burmese Chinese Thakin Ba Thein Tin from Mergui (Myeik or Beik). Many of the Thakins were of mixed ancestry of course, but I can’t think of any pure ethnic Thakin. Perhaps Hla Oo might.
There’s a google book titled The Dobama movement in Burma (1930-1938) by Daw Khin Yi.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IqCxY4oZNf0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=dobama&source=bl&ots=hU7kYn0_sK&sig=Mej_nK9lzFF_eGuFwyGpxKC6xmY&hl=en&ei=oWSaTLK7HtO6jAf73p0e&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCsQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false
The word Burman was coined by the British though, not by the army. And it was used to distinguish the ethnic group from the rest.
Whilst I agree with Hla Oo that Bama replaced by Myanmar in a song sucks, I beg to differ when he says Burmese also tend to pronounce every word harsh and sharp, and I honestly believe it is our racial character as a proud martial race. Even Japanese can be soft spoken, depends how anyone delivers it. He can speak for himself but unfortunately he is in the habit of making sweeping generalisations.
The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism
Ralph Kramden #4 :
“Art is not a mirror held up to reality, but a hammer with which
to shape it.”
The power of art and symbols against authoritarianism
speaking of the BACC, you may want to take a look at who runs it and why many established thai artists refute to expose their art there…
Scenes from red Sunday
I went to observe the red shirt rally last Sunday and was impressed by the strong vigor and enthusiasm of the people. They were fearless. With my bare naked eyes, I estimated around 20,000-30,000 people joining the rally. I think the report above is pretty accurate in terms of the sentiment of the people. But it is rather ill-informed and misleading when it comes to the role of Sombat Boon-Ngam-Anong in this regard. I am not sure if the translation of Sombat’s announcement was correct since I heard completely different messages and tone. Sombat has repeatedly made a clear stance that he is not trying to establish himself as one of the core leaders within the UDD. In my view, he is untainted by any personal or political agenda of Thaksin and therefore could potentially bring a genuinely fresh and positive force to the red shirts, including extensive support from progressive intellectuals, social activists and liberal forces to peaceful social movements. Unfortunately, he has no intention to lead the crowd in the traditional way that UDD leaders used to preach and failed in the past. The red shirt rally on sunday was largely organic and spontaneous as people were largely mobilized through informal social networks and the new media. It would be false to underestimate how heterogeneous the red shirt supporters are. The most interesting parts of Sombat’s approach to promoting voice and participation in a shrinking democratic space in Thailand are the use of symbols for peaceful resistance as well as the emphasis on bottom-up mobilization driven by the real people at the grassroots level to learn how to lead themselves (and demand for their equal civil and political rights) as opposed to replying on any core leaders. This means more organic red shirt movements led by small different groups will have to happen spontaneously in different places. In the long run, the Thais will have to get over the old mentality, the hope for a white knight to save our day, as well as the preoccupation over Thaksin and his successors. Only the people and their strong strong conviction in the possibility of a fairer and more just society will lead us to a necessary structural reform, which allows for more sustainable democratization process in Thailand. That seems like a farfetched dream at least in the short run.
Sulak on Buddhism and the red shirts
WLH #1 :
re : “Rama V before exams, as he is the informal patron saint of education. Perhaps social progressives, activists, and would-be statesmen could make offerings to Pridi?”.
Yes – I agree. But bear in mind – that to millions of “Thais”/Siamese, including millions of Red Shirt sympathisers – Rama V, Chulalongkorn, is THE patron saint of social progressives, activists, and true statesmen, Pridi included.
Sonthi’s secret billion
[…] […]