I would add that the army has infiltrated the monarchy through Prem, other retired generals and lackeys on the Privy Council.
Having secured 2 points of the triangle the military have also infiltrated and control virtually all significant legal and illegal businesses.
And the politicians, with the exceptions of Pridi, maybe Kukrit, maybe a couple of others until those inspired by the 1997 Constitution, Chuan, Thaksin, Samak, Somchai have been part of or at least not brave enough to try to buck the military.
So now, instead of 3 points Thailand really only has one plus some rebels who can see it badly needs to change.
Corruption is a product of the Thai structure of military dictatorship. Developing a culture of regular elections where the people hold their MPs accountable is what will resolve corruption and other issues inherent in the current pyramid balanced on one point.
The democratic government will have to sort out the military (remove them from any involvement inside Thailand) and the judiciary with the people reviewing their performance.
…if we prefer democracy, but it’s not in our future it will affect a lot of rural people… whether or not Thailand is democratic or not the middle class will not be affected anyway…
That does not presage change…
Andrew Walker
I wonder what it’s going to take… they’ve rejected people at the ballot box… when people came to Bangkok to protest they’ve rejected that… they simply won’t accept that there are genuine political sentiments there… if they can’t win an election against an imprisoned and accused terrorist… if they don’t win very solidly… it’s going to call very publicly into question the credibility of their whole so-called reconciliation program.
#7 Well, she may have been once. And she does appear to be trying to keep some 0f her powder dry. One can despise the man and still hope that his daughter finds out who murdered her father and for what reason.
Its somewhat ironic that she gets all this accolade from people who were clearly intent on using the funeral for their own purposes, regardless of her previous sentiments. No one would ever thik about giving her the space to figure things out in her own time and in her own way.
In her circumstances, I would have made it very clear I did not want either faction at the funeral, or the royal sponsorship, and to hell with them all. And just invite the family, friends and locals. But as a frequent funeral-flyer, I have to say that no one here ever gives the greivers any space to have their own private thoughts. You may wish for a fairly private funeral and still have to watch it being hijacked by those who want to personally benefit from it. Thus one has to put up with such wonderful spectacles as people accusing each other of murder over the dead body of their victim.
thank you for your response to my attempts to onjectify and summarize Thaksins position
I was not fully engaged with Thaksins activities at that time as it seems you were, so forgive me if I am belittling your opinions
Reading what you say about Thaksin trying to “to muscle his police allies in” I wonder if Thaksin was rather than just adding police he was trying to replace the military.
Its my belief that police should be used in all actions inside the country, in the south, managing protests, protecting public figures like the King, etc. The military should be restricted to preparations and actions outside. Do you have any views on this as an objective for Thailand?
So, knowing as you do how entrenched the military are in all aspects of legal and illegal businesses and politics in Thailand how would you go about transitioning them out?
Do you think its possible Thaksin was taking some difficult initial steps towards this? And bearing furious PR attacks by the military, the monarchy and their agents as a result?
#63 “hard to know why people kept voting him in but he was supported by big business who did well based on war spending and the financial boom”
So it’s OK to wonder that about John Howard. But when we have similar thoughts about Thaksin we are immediately labelled anti-democratic by the self-appointed ‘democracy’ mavens. Since most people in this forum remain very firmly against coup-plotters, I think we have the continuing right to be extremely critical of any of the knuckledraggers of the local elite, regardless of the shirt color they hope to profit from.
.
“While a country with an authoritarian political system and a developed economy in the 21st century remains an untested hypothesis …” What about Singapore?
It does seem that most working democracies do need a balance of power to be maintained. In the US it would be the three cornered balance between the President, the Senate and Congress, and the Supreme Court.
In parliamentary democracies like the UK we again have a balance with a lower house, an upper house, and a non-executive head of state, in this case the monarch. In Australia, rightly or wrongly, this led to the removal of a prime minister in the not too distant past.
In Thailand for a long time we have had a strange power balance between the politicians, the head of state, and the army. The various constitutions written in my time here have always attempted a re-balance to get the Thai version of democracy going again.
Prior to 2006 we saw an attempt to change the balance from the political side by Thaksin in trying to get his own family and friends into leading positions in all parts of government including the army. I’m not going to try to understand what was in various people’s minds regarding the future succession, but the attacks on Prem prior to 2006 were part of whatever plans were being hatched. In a way it should be no surprise that the army did react the way it did. It’s possible they could have imagined a return to absolute power, but this time under Thaksin.
Now should there be a better balance of power in Thai democracy, one where the army doesn’t play a role? Surely the answer is yes, but we would need something like the judiciary to step up to the role that army held. (In fact I believe there have been signs of that happening.) Can extra-parliamentary street protests whether red or yellow fill this role? Can’t really see it myself.
One of the biggest drawbacks to achieving a better democracy here is the corruption of the politicians of all parties and the big political families. This is not unique to Thailand in the region. You can see it in the likes of Pakistan and Philippines. The latest constitution did in some ways try and reform the political parties, and it maybe the last chance to do that for many years. What will destroy it is handing out pardons for those caught breaking the rules.
#55 I have read those 6 paragraphs several times over, and they don’t impress me very much, since I remember being distinctly underwhelmed by the tawdry reality of those times. The following is the one paragraph that seemed worthy of attention.
“My observation is that he tried to work with the existing forces to achieve his policies and overtime attempted to exert his authority to restructure them.”
You seem to be giving a very mediocre man qualities that were far from obvious in practice. His handling of the South was impetuous to say the least. In a situation in which the utmost diplomacy was called for, your portrayal of him working with existing forces was nowhere apparent. At the time, it looked like little more than a very sleazy attempt to muscle his police allies in on some dodgy cross-border business. This situation called for tact. All we actually got was the impetuosness of a man who clearly did not have his mind fully engaged on the very difficult task of trying to improve one of Thailand’s most intractable problems. Well that’s Thaksin for you! If he could ever get his mind off his own family’s constant desire for ever more power & wealth, he might eventually begin to have the makings of second-rate local politician.
You are trying to tarnish me with the Sondhi brush. I’ve made my view on that man obvious on numerous occasions, but you seem to prefer to airbrush out any signs that there are more than two sides to this debate. Unlike Sondhi, I am not hamstrung by the sort of soppy sentimental monarchism that most Thai politicians use to excuse their surfeit of negative energies.
#4
“As I understand Saedaeng learned a lot in the past few years by listening to folk around the country, giving them a refuge during the chaos, and travelling to the countryside frequently or walking among the urban poor. As people told me everywhere I went: he aligned himself against the fallangist state and made every effort even at the risk of his own life to protect people during the demonstrations.”
But note this. He, like most Thai VIPs, was incapable of admitting his heavy complicity in that repression. Thus I conclude he was not a reformed character – just one who had developed some new deceptions to mask the fact that his fascism was still very much intact.
As he clearly was one of the gung-ho, gun-happy uniformed sadists of this country, the only way I believe he could redeem himself was by taking some responsibility for his past & recent irresponsibility and violence. That would also involve him learning to shut up and allow other more reasonable voices to be heard. We owe the motormouths of both sides of the Thai elite precisely nothing.
Who knows who killed the man. His dead body could clearly have been of some value to more than one succession faction. By glossing over his numerous crimes, we are condoning the continuing sleeziness of Thai politics. And as Thaksin will inevitably return as PM, we will be sending him the message that he should resume his despotic and kleptocratic ways. Thus we will get a Thaksin who has learned precisely nothing from his experiences. Seen in this light, the glorification of the unholy Sae Daeng is pure appeasement of the status quo.
This forum is incapable of tackling this country’s tendency to grayngjai its oppressors, but we shouldn’t be in any hurry to endorse unrepentent violence & repression either.
“The cold war ended with almost universal acceptance that market based economies that engage in international trade provide a better life for their citizens than do closed economies with central planning.”
Burmese learned it hard way by slogging under Ne Win’s fake socialist rule for more than a quarter century from 1962 to 1988.
But when they reversed their economic way to a market economy without a democracy they are stopped by a huge roadblock called sanctions from the West courtesy of ASSK and Burmese exiles.
Civil war in Burma may be over but the economic cold war is raging and the people of Burma are the collateral damage!
So you did Andrew, thank you one unanswered comment finally made it.
Do you think there’s too much Les Abbey Andrew? Where would I rate compared to others? Did I over do it in June? If I took a more pro-red shirt line would that be OK? If I didn’t point out that you can’t have a legitimate pro-democracy movement to write about while it also takes the Thaksin money, would that help?
Funny a few months ago we were talking about comments being delayed, and now we are talking about them being made to disappear. Smells a little bit of Stalinism to me. Still never that great a leap from Trotsky to Stalin.
[Editor – NSF: “Les Abbey”, we delay comments, we edit comments and, when appropriate, we delete comments. Stalinism? Seriously? Best wishes to all, Nich]
James C. Scott struggles to find a suitable “state-resistant space,” in combination with “historylessness” ethnic groups who practice “escape agriculture” in the upland area of Southeast Asia, a difficult task in this day and time.
The major shortcoming of James C. Scott’s Zomian thesis is the lack of understanding the rapid forces of globalization and information technology that have been spreading across rural mainland Southeast Asia. As a result, there’s hardly any place beyond the reach of the Southeast Asian States, either capitalist or socialist characteristics of the State.
In addition, relocating people from the world’s hot-spot region to Southeast Asia is difficult because they would not be able to escape the United States’ modern intelligence surveillance.
“In fact, there is a growing dissatisfaction for democracy in much of the world. ”
lots of people think that “if only they or their mates were in power then everything would be better”
the only question is how serious they really are and whether very many people share their delusion
the issue is, how to make sure that a dictatorship is “benign” and who it is “benign” for
there are some in Burma that are happy with rule by the military junta
there are also some that are happy in Thailand with the military in charge, which it has been almost continuously since about 1940 (in connivance with the monarchy)
this article uses “stability and economic growth” as the criteria for satisfaction
Burma fails on this criterion whereas Thailand at some level seemed successful, as it happened it was more successful in the early part of the Thaksin democratic reign but this was spoilt by the military funded yellow agitators
democracies seem better mostly because they seem to be able to deliver a good level of “stability and economic growth” with minimum brutality and repression
whereas dictatorships/non-elected systems like Thailand usually need brutality and repression to secure their position
except in some countries like Cuba and Vietnam where socially motivated “dictators” took charge to overcome the evils of western colonialism
in Australia we had John Howard for 4 terms, 8 long years, seemingly riding on George Bush’s back
hard to know why people kept voting him in but he was supported by big business who did well based on war spending and the financial boom (bubble)
workers in Oz lost a lot of rights in t e work place, less health and safety, less security, lower wages and generally less basic legal freedoms but seems voters do “like” gung ho kill the terrorists and solve crimes by throwing them in gaol type politics
now we have a Labour “more socialist” government that has moved to the right continuing many of Howards policies with only some extremes reduced
sad for us that believe in strong freedoms under the law
but at least our military are under civilian control and not permitted any involvement in business and politics
its the military that screw Thailand for their own benefit
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
New politics, new leader
Not an avid PAD fan myself in the least, but just an observation.
Many key contestant drop out because whatever anyone say, the real leader would still be Sondhi L. So, does this make Somsak the puppet of Sondhi?
Or to use their own word, a “nominee” leader?
Oh, the irony…
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Les Abbey #65
I am pleased to see your views on the army
I would add that the army has infiltrated the monarchy through Prem, other retired generals and lackeys on the Privy Council.
Having secured 2 points of the triangle the military have also infiltrated and control virtually all significant legal and illegal businesses.
And the politicians, with the exceptions of Pridi, maybe Kukrit, maybe a couple of others until those inspired by the 1997 Constitution, Chuan, Thaksin, Samak, Somchai have been part of or at least not brave enough to try to buck the military.
So now, instead of 3 points Thailand really only has one plus some rebels who can see it badly needs to change.
Corruption is a product of the Thai structure of military dictatorship. Developing a culture of regular elections where the people hold their MPs accountable is what will resolve corruption and other issues inherent in the current pyramid balanced on one point.
The democratic government will have to sort out the military (remove them from any involvement inside Thailand) and the judiciary with the people reviewing their performance.
Thailand in Crisis: Episode 6
Pongphisoot Busbarat
That does not presage change…
Andrew Walker
Scenes from Saedaeng’s funeral
#7 Well, she may have been once. And she does appear to be trying to keep some 0f her powder dry. One can despise the man and still hope that his daughter finds out who murdered her father and for what reason.
Its somewhat ironic that she gets all this accolade from people who were clearly intent on using the funeral for their own purposes, regardless of her previous sentiments. No one would ever thik about giving her the space to figure things out in her own time and in her own way.
In her circumstances, I would have made it very clear I did not want either faction at the funeral, or the royal sponsorship, and to hell with them all. And just invite the family, friends and locals. But as a frequent funeral-flyer, I have to say that no one here ever gives the greivers any space to have their own private thoughts. You may wish for a fairly private funeral and still have to watch it being hijacked by those who want to personally benefit from it. Thus one has to put up with such wonderful spectacles as people accusing each other of murder over the dead body of their victim.
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Fred Korat #64
thank you for your response to my attempts to onjectify and summarize Thaksins position
I was not fully engaged with Thaksins activities at that time as it seems you were, so forgive me if I am belittling your opinions
Reading what you say about Thaksin trying to “to muscle his police allies in” I wonder if Thaksin was rather than just adding police he was trying to replace the military.
Its my belief that police should be used in all actions inside the country, in the south, managing protests, protecting public figures like the King, etc. The military should be restricted to preparations and actions outside. Do you have any views on this as an objective for Thailand?
So, knowing as you do how entrenched the military are in all aspects of legal and illegal businesses and politics in Thailand how would you go about transitioning them out?
Do you think its possible Thaksin was taking some difficult initial steps towards this? And bearing furious PR attacks by the military, the monarchy and their agents as a result?
Jakrapob on the state within the state
#63 “hard to know why people kept voting him in but he was supported by big business who did well based on war spending and the financial boom”
So it’s OK to wonder that about John Howard. But when we have similar thoughts about Thaksin we are immediately labelled anti-democratic by the self-appointed ‘democracy’ mavens. Since most people in this forum remain very firmly against coup-plotters, I think we have the continuing right to be extremely critical of any of the knuckledraggers of the local elite, regardless of the shirt color they hope to profit from.
.
Thailand: A Battle Ground for the New Cold War?
“While a country with an authoritarian political system and a developed economy in the 21st century remains an untested hypothesis …” What about Singapore?
Jakrapob on the state within the state
It does seem that most working democracies do need a balance of power to be maintained. In the US it would be the three cornered balance between the President, the Senate and Congress, and the Supreme Court.
In parliamentary democracies like the UK we again have a balance with a lower house, an upper house, and a non-executive head of state, in this case the monarch. In Australia, rightly or wrongly, this led to the removal of a prime minister in the not too distant past.
In Thailand for a long time we have had a strange power balance between the politicians, the head of state, and the army. The various constitutions written in my time here have always attempted a re-balance to get the Thai version of democracy going again.
Prior to 2006 we saw an attempt to change the balance from the political side by Thaksin in trying to get his own family and friends into leading positions in all parts of government including the army. I’m not going to try to understand what was in various people’s minds regarding the future succession, but the attacks on Prem prior to 2006 were part of whatever plans were being hatched. In a way it should be no surprise that the army did react the way it did. It’s possible they could have imagined a return to absolute power, but this time under Thaksin.
Now should there be a better balance of power in Thai democracy, one where the army doesn’t play a role? Surely the answer is yes, but we would need something like the judiciary to step up to the role that army held. (In fact I believe there have been signs of that happening.) Can extra-parliamentary street protests whether red or yellow fill this role? Can’t really see it myself.
One of the biggest drawbacks to achieving a better democracy here is the corruption of the politicians of all parties and the big political families. This is not unique to Thailand in the region. You can see it in the likes of Pakistan and Philippines. The latest constitution did in some ways try and reform the political parties, and it maybe the last chance to do that for many years. What will destroy it is handing out pardons for those caught breaking the rules.
Jakrapob on the state within the state
#55 I have read those 6 paragraphs several times over, and they don’t impress me very much, since I remember being distinctly underwhelmed by the tawdry reality of those times. The following is the one paragraph that seemed worthy of attention.
“My observation is that he tried to work with the existing forces to achieve his policies and overtime attempted to exert his authority to restructure them.”
You seem to be giving a very mediocre man qualities that were far from obvious in practice. His handling of the South was impetuous to say the least. In a situation in which the utmost diplomacy was called for, your portrayal of him working with existing forces was nowhere apparent. At the time, it looked like little more than a very sleazy attempt to muscle his police allies in on some dodgy cross-border business. This situation called for tact. All we actually got was the impetuosness of a man who clearly did not have his mind fully engaged on the very difficult task of trying to improve one of Thailand’s most intractable problems. Well that’s Thaksin for you! If he could ever get his mind off his own family’s constant desire for ever more power & wealth, he might eventually begin to have the makings of second-rate local politician.
You are trying to tarnish me with the Sondhi brush. I’ve made my view on that man obvious on numerous occasions, but you seem to prefer to airbrush out any signs that there are more than two sides to this debate. Unlike Sondhi, I am not hamstrung by the sort of soppy sentimental monarchism that most Thai politicians use to excuse their surfeit of negative energies.
Scenes from Saedaeng’s funeral
Isn’t the daughter a yellow shirt supporter?
Scenes from Saedaeng’s funeral
#4
“As I understand Saedaeng learned a lot in the past few years by listening to folk around the country, giving them a refuge during the chaos, and travelling to the countryside frequently or walking among the urban poor. As people told me everywhere I went: he aligned himself against the fallangist state and made every effort even at the risk of his own life to protect people during the demonstrations.”
But note this. He, like most Thai VIPs, was incapable of admitting his heavy complicity in that repression. Thus I conclude he was not a reformed character – just one who had developed some new deceptions to mask the fact that his fascism was still very much intact.
As he clearly was one of the gung-ho, gun-happy uniformed sadists of this country, the only way I believe he could redeem himself was by taking some responsibility for his past & recent irresponsibility and violence. That would also involve him learning to shut up and allow other more reasonable voices to be heard. We owe the motormouths of both sides of the Thai elite precisely nothing.
Who knows who killed the man. His dead body could clearly have been of some value to more than one succession faction. By glossing over his numerous crimes, we are condoning the continuing sleeziness of Thai politics. And as Thaksin will inevitably return as PM, we will be sending him the message that he should resume his despotic and kleptocratic ways. Thus we will get a Thaksin who has learned precisely nothing from his experiences. Seen in this light, the glorification of the unholy Sae Daeng is pure appeasement of the status quo.
This forum is incapable of tackling this country’s tendency to grayngjai its oppressors, but we shouldn’t be in any hurry to endorse unrepentent violence & repression either.
Thailand: A Battle Ground for the New Cold War?
“The cold war ended with almost universal acceptance that market based economies that engage in international trade provide a better life for their citizens than do closed economies with central planning.”
Burmese learned it hard way by slogging under Ne Win’s fake socialist rule for more than a quarter century from 1962 to 1988.
But when they reversed their economic way to a market economy without a democracy they are stopped by a huge roadblock called sanctions from the West courtesy of ASSK and Burmese exiles.
Civil war in Burma may be over but the economic cold war is raging and the people of Burma are the collateral damage!
Thailand in Crisis: Episode 6
So you did Andrew, thank you one unanswered comment finally made it.
Do you think there’s too much Les Abbey Andrew? Where would I rate compared to others? Did I over do it in June? If I took a more pro-red shirt line would that be OK? If I didn’t point out that you can’t have a legitimate pro-democracy movement to write about while it also takes the Thaksin money, would that help?
Funny a few months ago we were talking about comments being delayed, and now we are talking about them being made to disappear. Smells a little bit of Stalinism to me. Still never that great a leap from Trotsky to Stalin.
[Editor – NSF: “Les Abbey”, we delay comments, we edit comments and, when appropriate, we delete comments. Stalinism? Seriously? Best wishes to all, Nich]
Scenes from Saedaeng’s funeral
Jim Taylor – 4
And the informants, real or imagined?
Review of The Art of Not Being Governed
James C. Scott struggles to find a suitable “state-resistant space,” in combination with “historylessness” ethnic groups who practice “escape agriculture” in the upland area of Southeast Asia, a difficult task in this day and time.
The major shortcoming of James C. Scott’s Zomian thesis is the lack of understanding the rapid forces of globalization and information technology that have been spreading across rural mainland Southeast Asia. As a result, there’s hardly any place beyond the reach of the Southeast Asian States, either capitalist or socialist characteristics of the State.
In addition, relocating people from the world’s hot-spot region to Southeast Asia is difficult because they would not be able to escape the United States’ modern intelligence surveillance.
New Thai street signs
cw: it is a critical quarterly intellectual journal published in Thailand: http://www.readjournal.org/
Thailand: A Battle Ground for the New Cold War?
“In fact, there is a growing dissatisfaction for democracy in much of the world. ”
lots of people think that “if only they or their mates were in power then everything would be better”
the only question is how serious they really are and whether very many people share their delusion
the issue is, how to make sure that a dictatorship is “benign” and who it is “benign” for
there are some in Burma that are happy with rule by the military junta
there are also some that are happy in Thailand with the military in charge, which it has been almost continuously since about 1940 (in connivance with the monarchy)
this article uses “stability and economic growth” as the criteria for satisfaction
Burma fails on this criterion whereas Thailand at some level seemed successful, as it happened it was more successful in the early part of the Thaksin democratic reign but this was spoilt by the military funded yellow agitators
democracies seem better mostly because they seem to be able to deliver a good level of “stability and economic growth” with minimum brutality and repression
whereas dictatorships/non-elected systems like Thailand usually need brutality and repression to secure their position
except in some countries like Cuba and Vietnam where socially motivated “dictators” took charge to overcome the evils of western colonialism
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Tukkae #61
seems to me the critical questions are:
did the German Chancellor and John Howard use military or other force outside the democratic process to maintain their rule?
did Thaksin use military or other force outside the democratic process to maintain his rule?
has Thaksin been tried and convicted of any crime that should have terminated his rule?
if not, then the Thais that did not want him in power should have just worked within the democratic processes and tried to outvote him at an election
New politics, new leader
Does this party still exist? Will there be anyone crazy enough to vote for this party?
Jakrapob on the state within the state
Tukkae #61
in Australia we had John Howard for 4 terms, 8 long years, seemingly riding on George Bush’s back
hard to know why people kept voting him in but he was supported by big business who did well based on war spending and the financial boom (bubble)
workers in Oz lost a lot of rights in t e work place, less health and safety, less security, lower wages and generally less basic legal freedoms but seems voters do “like” gung ho kill the terrorists and solve crimes by throwing them in gaol type politics
now we have a Labour “more socialist” government that has moved to the right continuing many of Howards policies with only some extremes reduced
sad for us that believe in strong freedoms under the law
but at least our military are under civilian control and not permitted any involvement in business and politics
its the military that screw Thailand for their own benefit