When a nation is conditioned to accepting corruption as a social norm wether political or within the security forces how will any reform change the habits of the entire nation.
Frank in Korat here. If you are open to the suggestion, can you send me your email address? I would like to meet you in Korat if you are there. I may be back there in early August. Thanks. [email protected]
“That situation is vastly different than what happens in Thailand, where the electorate doesn’t really get a say (although sometimes their choice may be ‘tolerated’ for a while)”
And another difference: even though she was Deputy Leader of the party winning the last election, one of Mrs Gillard’s first statements was “I also certainly acknowledge I have not been elected prime minister by the Australian people. And in the coming months, I will ask the Governor-General to call a general election so that the Australian people can exercise their birthright and choose their prime minister.”
But then, her party seems to have a good chance of winning that election…..
While i think these podcasts are great; sometimes there can be a bit of ‘economic’ license’. When looking at income distribution as a share of output overtime its also necessary to look at the composition of the output. Output is not static and in Thailand, the shift from an agrarian economy to a manufacturing one skews the results away from the bottom quintiles as their share would go down even though there income may have risen simply because the growth rate in manufacturing activities was higher. I’m in now way trying to hide from the fact that Thailand has inequality issues; but a more accurate measure should be used. (what i don’t know). The structure of national income in Thailand has changed dramatically as one would expect in a developing country and that makes the use of traditional macro tools that much harder. That agriculture has not kept up is a big problem; but the issues are perhaps less worrisome than the data would portray. One interesting series is the comes from the the human needs survey and that points to a developing trend of wage growth in provincial Thailand; wages as opposed to a ‘sufficiency’ seasonal income purely from the land. How that gets analyzed would be an interesting next podcast.
This afternoon saw the usual police money trap – catching people who don’t go straight from the left only lane. They always set this checkpoint only at the end of the month, everybody knows the deal.
So one guy simply refused to stop when they tried to pull him over, he just drove around the waving policeman and that was the end of it.
This little episode shows the essence of the relationship between the police force and the public – people expect the police to perform traffic service, they don’t mind getting caught for breaking a little rule, they don’t mind paying a hundred baht to policemen personally, knowing their meager salaries.
However, if people don’t feel like paying they just ignore them and the police also know they can’t really enforce their half legal operation.
They can’t enforce fully legal rules either, it all depends on public cooperation.
Against this background I don’t really get the meaning of “police reform”. I’m not against it, per se, I just don’t see it has been thought through.
Rudd was dumped because he was elected on the promise of big changes after the Howard era and failed to deliver. It didn’t help that he pissed off a lot of his colleagues with high handed behavior either.
The only international relevance is the parallels to what Obama is doing in the US.
I’m so not going to talk about spiritual aspect of Ghandi since the red doesn’t have that “spiritual leader” like that of Ghandi
Since Gandhi made it abundantly clear that the “spiritual aspect” was the core & why he kept going & the practical basis of his ahimsa philosophy, then I don’t get why you’d bring up Gandhi’s “non-violence concepts” at all. Peter Warr said the Red Shirts are “not explicitly non-violent” like Gandhi was explicitly non-violent. Like you say, the Red Shirts do not have a specific spiritual non-violent force. So, they don’t have any group-level, leadership-agreed intention to “use non-violence concept” as Gandhi intended. I’m not sure what part of this you disagree with. But you seem to disagree somewhere.
If an organization does not espouse non-violence and then its members commit violent deeds or are “not unencouraged” to do so, the responsibility for being “not non-violent” lies with the organization and its leadership. The lies, exaggerations, propaganda, rumours, and whatever, which go beyond this, are someone else’s fault. But the fact of being “not non-violent” is the responsibility of, in this case, UDD. Victims of exaggeration and/or propaganda, yup, can be; but they have no one else to blame for being “not non-violent”.
If you want to be perceived as non-violent, be hard-headedly non-violent. There are a lot of complicated things in the Thailand situation. This isn’t one of them.
I beg you read what happened in Kheda.
And because of Gandhi’s hard-headed concepts, we focus not on the violence, but on the lifelong cries for ahimsa. “One mishap” doesn’t ruin our overall perception in this case.
in case of Thailand … they will never get all of the population to support them.
Yup. Like I said, if you’re really all-out non-violent, you’re going to have to suffer more if the “sides” are less clear.
A student just returned from Yangon reports that electricity is only available now for 6 hours a day, and the supply of running water is less than that–only a few hours. There is also no water pressure available for taps on the top floors of flats, and water has to be carried upstairs.
No matter how bad things look at the moment and how much control all these elites have today, they cannot live forever. There days will all come to an end as happens to everyone.
Hopefully as evolution progresses and the population gets more educated and becomes more informed and sickened by the oppression that is now put upon the majority by these self righteous elites, the government will be returned to the people by majority rule, not rule of a few for their own gain.
All you have to do is wait. Change is coming, slow but sure!
“Am I oversimplifying and dehumanizing your point?” >> Neither. You have, as usual, applied your brilliant intellect to analyse a problem of Thai society. Thank you with all of my heart!
Amorn Wanichwiwatana. 2005. “The 1998 Thai Police Reform: A Study of the Persistence of Institutional Corruption.” Thesis (D. Phil.), University of Oxford iv+270 pp.
At present, old right-winger and anti-Thaksin activist Wasit has been tasked by Abhisit to head another “police reform” panel. Given the political preferences in wide circles of the police, this seems to be an odd choice.
“Tarrin, donations to the parties are officially registered. Quick search gave 130 mil to TRT vs 39 mil to Dems in 2006 (until August).
On the eve of 2005 elections Pojamarn caused a bit of a furor with giving TRT 50 mil herself.”
Comforting to imagine that all donations are declared* and thus “officially registered”…..
2005? Hmmm…. something familiar about that date in the context of donations….. Ah yes – TPI Polene and their 258 “mil”.
*“….. according to the official numbers published by the Election Commission alone, , the total amount of public subsidies given to various political parties in the period 1998 to 2001 accounted only for 67 percent of the reported total donations alone, not accounting for unreported donations, slush funds and other “black money” (Siripan 2006: 96; ECT 2008). In 2006 (latest year for which figures are available), the total amount of FDP subsidies to political parties was 271 million Baht; at the same time, parties reported 235 million Baht in donations. In 2007, the total amount of reported donations almost doubled to 416.8 million Baht.
It seems clear that the amount of donations recorded by the ECT did not reflect actual contributions, which in reality are certainly far greater than those reported to the ECT. Actually, private funding does not go to parties but to individuals.”
I don’t know what exactly needs to be reformed in the police force.
Let’s be realistic – they will always control the vice trade, reform or no reform.
Will they stop shooting suspects? Possibly, but you don’t need a reform for that, and, with wide public support for summary executions in some cases, it’s the society itself that needs a reform, not the police.
I guess everyone wants them to solve more burglaries, return more stolen cars and catch more rapists but I don’t see how a reform would help that.
Theoretically, if they didn’t spend so much time on covering for underground businesses they’d improve their overall performance, but, as I said, they are not going to give up that kind of income no matter what, and somebody would step in their shoes anyway, and the society needs its vice trade, too, no reforms would ever change that.
Samson – Why would you endorse that public sentiment for harsh justice when the police are very well provided for, by the drug dealers they don’t shoot?
I think the following talks to the essentials of the Thai “labor problem”,and not just the Thai… It is the reason I so despise the smirking, academics who never tire of ridiculing the “sufficiency economy”. Certainly that implementation has been co-opted by the criminal “elite” in Bangkok… but what it purports to address is at the center of life in Thailand, according to me. And not only to me…
These days, farming families make up only 4% of the EU population. Several organic farmers told me that across Europe 400 000 farmers are pushed out of their farms every year. The organic farmers I met said that although they are relatively poor they don’t feel poor. Some work as part-time activists, unionists and artists. Most make time to read, campaign and engage in active struggle for global justice. They enjoy life, feel fortunate and have no thoughts that being a small farmer is anything to be ashamed of.
In contrast, small farmers in the South feel themselves at the bottom of their nation’s economic hierarchy. They are looked-down upon as dumb peasants by Asia’s new urbanites, and made to feel that their work is undignified and shameful.
The ability of Asia’s small farmers to maintain self-sufficient life-styles is being destroyed by contract-farming and the growing impacts and pressures from agri-industry and agri-business and their parent corporations, which force small farmers intoc ycles of accumulating debt and, as in Europe, off the land.
As the holders of indigenous agricultural knowledge, as producers of organic food, as stewards of the bio-diversity of the landscape, as upholders of rural traditions, small farmers have only real reasons to be proud of their occupations, and basic, common sense demands an answer to a basic question.
What good reason can neo-liberal capitalists give for attempting to annihilate small-scale farmers? They don’t have any good reasons. neo-liberal capitalists have ‘interests’ – to own and control land, to own and control the means of production, the food market and the profit. And what is the impact of their interests? Nothing but increasing disease, poverty, suffering and environmental destruction, accompanied by rising levels of fear, paranoia, terrorism, loss of freedom of expression, increased public surveillance and militarism.
For decades millions of humiliated, small farmers have been bundling what they can into whatever transport they can find to head into the cities – in hope of something. The cities of the South are now jam-packed with people that a few years ago were self-sufficient. There is no way that the authorities in our mega-cities can ensure the physical and mental well-being of these migrants. The exodus from the land must be halted, and labour activists in both South and North must broaden their perceptions and perspectives, and investigate and learn to better incorporate the issue of the de-population of the land into their strategic discussions, analyses and agendas.
Many of my friends show surprise or astonishment when they hear me talking about organic farming. Are you no longer a labour activist they ask! Extinguishing and substituting small-scale farming with mono-culture agri-industry commanded by multi-national corporations has no logical connection to the eradication of poverty. On the contrary, all evidence points in the opposite direction – to increasing poverty, slum conditions, risk of epidemics and a whole bunch of negative impacts reflected in negative climate change.
The issues of the landless and soon to be landless small farmers cannot be held separate from the issues of the millions of workers labouring in the industrial zones.
Mass market manufacturing is dependent on its ability to maintain a continuous supply of cheap labour. The agri-industry – the ‘food for the world industry’ – wants small farmers off the land, wants the land levelled and wants the young blood of the land for serving their conveyers as cleaners, cutters, packers and branders.
Like union-busting, bankrupting small farmers may be in the interests of capitalism but it is not in the interests of the future of life on the planet. It is in the real immediate and long-term interests of all people, especially working-class people to support small-scale farmers and their efforts to defend themselves, so that they can move forward to the production of clean, organic food and end the migration of agricultural workers into over- crowded cities.
Suzie: There’s a big difference between how Thaksin & Rudd were removed.
Rudd was tolerated as ALP leader when he was a likely election winner, but that was no longer the case after so many stuff ups during his reign – so the knives came out – self interest by ALP MP’s, nothing more than that.
If the electorate don’t like what the ALP have done, they will vote accordingly at the next election.
That situation is vastly different than what happens in Thailand, where the electorate doesn’t really get a say (although sometimes their choice may be ‘tolerated’ for a while)
Yet again the pod casts are very insightful and have broadened my knowledge.
I am interested in the historical evolution of the oligarch families that have such a strong influence not only in Thai economics and governance but also their influence in social sterotyping of the lower classes through the media.
I have read extensively on the socio/political problems in Thailand but fail to come across actual information on true reasons for the evolution of disparity and equality.
From my own research I understand in the early part of last century the Chinese disporas which make up much of the present elite class where given full citizen rights in the kingdom and from that time forward have become the wealthiest most influential group inThailand.
Why is there very little discourse on the nature and effects of Chinese disporas throughout South East Asia, especially in Thailand.?
Chinese disporas have seen civil unrest in various South East Asian countries due to their mistreatment of indigenous populations as well as their collusion with indigenous elites in terms of corruption. E.G INdonesia and the Solomons.
It has been said that without the Chinese influence on the Thai economy Thailand would not be as strong as it would be today. Many within the Chinese/Thai community proclaim that indigenous Thai are ignorant and lazy. This kind of racial sterotyping I feel has suited them well in creating a social environment where they alone assume the right to rule and influence social culture in their image.
There needs to be some sort of balance in the way power is held in the kingdom. At present Elite Sino/Thai hold all the power while the indigenous rural communities are left in some sort of feudal back water. For them moving forward is thwarted by the social conditioning placed upon them by cultural influences that in my own opinion are not moral or ethical but purely racial.
I am shocked by the way Kevin Michael Rudd was ousted. It seems to me Rudd was the second victim, Thaksin Shinawatra was the first one.
I think everyone should wake up to the present day reality of hegemonic challenge era. The global financial crisis is the international political economy aspect of it. And now domestic politics is used as an instrument to eliminate those who pursue foreign policy that is not in the interests of the “Hegemonic Challengers.”
China was happy with Rudd’s impeccable Mandarin, the U.S. was pleased with Rudd’s Asia Pacific Community foreign policy. So how it came to this?
Was it the lack of understanding about the politics of hegemonic challenge era? Was it the withering of American Hegemony? Or was it both of them?
I look forward to the emergence of a true heavy-weigh Australian leader in the coming election. Australia is extremely important to Asia and the Pacific.
I hope Kevin Rudd would not be hard on himself. It isn’t him, it’s world politics!
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thailand in crisis: Episode 4
StanG – 59
The 258 Mil is real and you are not the one who should talk about “legitimacy” claim.
Thai institutions: Police
When a nation is conditioned to accepting corruption as a social norm wether political or within the security forces how will any reform change the habits of the entire nation.
Sex, love and vote-buying
FredKorat:
Frank in Korat here. If you are open to the suggestion, can you send me your email address? I would like to meet you in Korat if you are there. I may be back there in early August. Thanks. [email protected]
Rudd and the APC – dead in the water?
c4
“That situation is vastly different than what happens in Thailand, where the electorate doesn’t really get a say (although sometimes their choice may be ‘tolerated’ for a while)”
And another difference: even though she was Deputy Leader of the party winning the last election, one of Mrs Gillard’s first statements was “I also certainly acknowledge I have not been elected prime minister by the Australian people. And in the coming months, I will ask the Governor-General to call a general election so that the Australian people can exercise their birthright and choose their prime minister.”
But then, her party seems to have a good chance of winning that election…..
Thailand in Crisis – Episode 5
While i think these podcasts are great; sometimes there can be a bit of ‘economic’ license’. When looking at income distribution as a share of output overtime its also necessary to look at the composition of the output. Output is not static and in Thailand, the shift from an agrarian economy to a manufacturing one skews the results away from the bottom quintiles as their share would go down even though there income may have risen simply because the growth rate in manufacturing activities was higher. I’m in now way trying to hide from the fact that Thailand has inequality issues; but a more accurate measure should be used. (what i don’t know). The structure of national income in Thailand has changed dramatically as one would expect in a developing country and that makes the use of traditional macro tools that much harder. That agriculture has not kept up is a big problem; but the issues are perhaps less worrisome than the data would portray. One interesting series is the comes from the the human needs survey and that points to a developing trend of wage growth in provincial Thailand; wages as opposed to a ‘sufficiency’ seasonal income purely from the land. How that gets analyzed would be an interesting next podcast.
Thailand in crisis: Episode 4
Yeah, Steve, still no evidence that Democrats had more money that TRT.
Not even one single analyst/commentator thought it was the case in those days.
It’s just something Tarrin pulled out of nowhere, arguing it actually gives an air of legitimacy to his copmletely unsubstantiated claim.
Thai institutions: Police
This afternoon saw the usual police money trap – catching people who don’t go straight from the left only lane. They always set this checkpoint only at the end of the month, everybody knows the deal.
So one guy simply refused to stop when they tried to pull him over, he just drove around the waving policeman and that was the end of it.
This little episode shows the essence of the relationship between the police force and the public – people expect the police to perform traffic service, they don’t mind getting caught for breaking a little rule, they don’t mind paying a hundred baht to policemen personally, knowing their meager salaries.
However, if people don’t feel like paying they just ignore them and the police also know they can’t really enforce their half legal operation.
They can’t enforce fully legal rules either, it all depends on public cooperation.
Against this background I don’t really get the meaning of “police reform”. I’m not against it, per se, I just don’t see it has been thought through.
Rudd and the APC – dead in the water?
Rudd was dumped because he was elected on the promise of big changes after the Howard era and failed to deliver. It didn’t help that he pissed off a lot of his colleagues with high handed behavior either.
The only international relevance is the parallels to what Obama is doing in the US.
Thailand in Crisis – Episode 5
Tarrin // Jun 28, 2010 at 2:34 am — 13
I’m so not going to talk about spiritual aspect of Ghandi since the red doesn’t have that “spiritual leader” like that of Ghandi
Since Gandhi made it abundantly clear that the “spiritual aspect” was the core & why he kept going & the practical basis of his ahimsa philosophy, then I don’t get why you’d bring up Gandhi’s “non-violence concepts” at all. Peter Warr said the Red Shirts are “not explicitly non-violent” like Gandhi was explicitly non-violent. Like you say, the Red Shirts do not have a specific spiritual non-violent force. So, they don’t have any group-level, leadership-agreed intention to “use non-violence concept” as Gandhi intended. I’m not sure what part of this you disagree with. But you seem to disagree somewhere.
If an organization does not espouse non-violence and then its members commit violent deeds or are “not unencouraged” to do so, the responsibility for being “not non-violent” lies with the organization and its leadership. The lies, exaggerations, propaganda, rumours, and whatever, which go beyond this, are someone else’s fault. But the fact of being “not non-violent” is the responsibility of, in this case, UDD. Victims of exaggeration and/or propaganda, yup, can be; but they have no one else to blame for being “not non-violent”.
If you want to be perceived as non-violent, be hard-headedly non-violent. There are a lot of complicated things in the Thailand situation. This isn’t one of them.
I beg you read what happened in Kheda.
And because of Gandhi’s hard-headed concepts, we focus not on the violence, but on the lifelong cries for ahimsa. “One mishap” doesn’t ruin our overall perception in this case.
in case of Thailand … they will never get all of the population to support them.
Yup. Like I said, if you’re really all-out non-violent, you’re going to have to suffer more if the “sides” are less clear.
Weekly heat, water and fire
A student just returned from Yangon reports that electricity is only available now for 6 hours a day, and the supply of running water is less than that–only a few hours. There is also no water pressure available for taps on the top floors of flats, and water has to be carried upstairs.
The challenges for Thailand’s arch-royalist military
No matter how bad things look at the moment and how much control all these elites have today, they cannot live forever. There days will all come to an end as happens to everyone.
Hopefully as evolution progresses and the population gets more educated and becomes more informed and sickened by the oppression that is now put upon the majority by these self righteous elites, the government will be returned to the people by majority rule, not rule of a few for their own gain.
All you have to do is wait. Change is coming, slow but sure!
Sex, love and vote-buying
StanG # 30
“Am I oversimplifying and dehumanizing your point?” >> Neither. You have, as usual, applied your brilliant intellect to analyse a problem of Thai society. Thank you with all of my heart!
Thai institutions: Police
For a dissertation on police reform, see
Amorn Wanichwiwatana. 2005. “The 1998 Thai Police Reform: A Study of the Persistence of Institutional Corruption.” Thesis (D. Phil.), University of Oxford iv+270 pp.
At present, old right-winger and anti-Thaksin activist Wasit has been tasked by Abhisit to head another “police reform” panel. Given the political preferences in wide circles of the police, this seems to be an odd choice.
Thailand in crisis: Episode 4
“Tarrin, donations to the parties are officially registered. Quick search gave 130 mil to TRT vs 39 mil to Dems in 2006 (until August).
On the eve of 2005 elections Pojamarn caused a bit of a furor with giving TRT 50 mil herself.”
Comforting to imagine that all donations are declared* and thus “officially registered”…..
2005? Hmmm…. something familiar about that date in the context of donations….. Ah yes – TPI Polene and their 258 “mil”.
*“….. according to the official numbers published by the Election Commission alone, , the total amount of public subsidies given to various political parties in the period 1998 to 2001 accounted only for 67 percent of the reported total donations alone, not accounting for unreported donations, slush funds and other “black money” (Siripan 2006: 96; ECT 2008). In 2006 (latest year for which figures are available), the total amount of FDP subsidies to political parties was 271 million Baht; at the same time, parties reported 235 million Baht in donations. In 2007, the total amount of reported donations almost doubled to 416.8 million Baht.
It seems clear that the amount of donations recorded by the ECT did not reflect actual contributions, which in reality are certainly far greater than those reported to the ECT. Actually, private funding does not go to parties but to individuals.”
[ http://www.uni-heidelberg.de/imperia/md/content/fakultaeten/wiso/ipw/croissant/publications/chambers_croissant_2008_intraparty_democracy.pdf page 49 ]
Thai institutions: Police
I don’t know what exactly needs to be reformed in the police force.
Let’s be realistic – they will always control the vice trade, reform or no reform.
Will they stop shooting suspects? Possibly, but you don’t need a reform for that, and, with wide public support for summary executions in some cases, it’s the society itself that needs a reform, not the police.
I guess everyone wants them to solve more burglaries, return more stolen cars and catch more rapists but I don’t see how a reform would help that.
Theoretically, if they didn’t spend so much time on covering for underground businesses they’d improve their overall performance, but, as I said, they are not going to give up that kind of income no matter what, and somebody would step in their shoes anyway, and the society needs its vice trade, too, no reforms would ever change that.
Thai institutions: Police
Samson – Why would you endorse that public sentiment for harsh justice when the police are very well provided for, by the drug dealers they don’t shoot?
Thai institutions: Unions
I think the following talks to the essentials of the Thai “labor problem”,and not just the Thai… It is the reason I so despise the smirking, academics who never tire of ridiculing the “sufficiency economy”. Certainly that implementation has been co-opted by the criminal “elite” in Bangkok… but what it purports to address is at the center of life in Thailand, according to me. And not only to me…
A critical report on SOLIDARITY BUILDING and NETWORKING with EUROPE
Rudd and the APC – dead in the water?
Suzie: There’s a big difference between how Thaksin & Rudd were removed.
Rudd was tolerated as ALP leader when he was a likely election winner, but that was no longer the case after so many stuff ups during his reign – so the knives came out – self interest by ALP MP’s, nothing more than that.
If the electorate don’t like what the ALP have done, they will vote accordingly at the next election.
That situation is vastly different than what happens in Thailand, where the electorate doesn’t really get a say (although sometimes their choice may be ‘tolerated’ for a while)
Thailand in Crisis – Episode 5
Yet again the pod casts are very insightful and have broadened my knowledge.
I am interested in the historical evolution of the oligarch families that have such a strong influence not only in Thai economics and governance but also their influence in social sterotyping of the lower classes through the media.
I have read extensively on the socio/political problems in Thailand but fail to come across actual information on true reasons for the evolution of disparity and equality.
From my own research I understand in the early part of last century the Chinese disporas which make up much of the present elite class where given full citizen rights in the kingdom and from that time forward have become the wealthiest most influential group inThailand.
Why is there very little discourse on the nature and effects of Chinese disporas throughout South East Asia, especially in Thailand.?
Chinese disporas have seen civil unrest in various South East Asian countries due to their mistreatment of indigenous populations as well as their collusion with indigenous elites in terms of corruption. E.G INdonesia and the Solomons.
It has been said that without the Chinese influence on the Thai economy Thailand would not be as strong as it would be today. Many within the Chinese/Thai community proclaim that indigenous Thai are ignorant and lazy. This kind of racial sterotyping I feel has suited them well in creating a social environment where they alone assume the right to rule and influence social culture in their image.
There needs to be some sort of balance in the way power is held in the kingdom. At present Elite Sino/Thai hold all the power while the indigenous rural communities are left in some sort of feudal back water. For them moving forward is thwarted by the social conditioning placed upon them by cultural influences that in my own opinion are not moral or ethical but purely racial.
Rudd and the APC – dead in the water?
I am shocked by the way Kevin Michael Rudd was ousted. It seems to me Rudd was the second victim, Thaksin Shinawatra was the first one.
I think everyone should wake up to the present day reality of hegemonic challenge era. The global financial crisis is the international political economy aspect of it. And now domestic politics is used as an instrument to eliminate those who pursue foreign policy that is not in the interests of the “Hegemonic Challengers.”
China was happy with Rudd’s impeccable Mandarin, the U.S. was pleased with Rudd’s Asia Pacific Community foreign policy. So how it came to this?
Was it the lack of understanding about the politics of hegemonic challenge era? Was it the withering of American Hegemony? Or was it both of them?
I look forward to the emergence of a true heavy-weigh Australian leader in the coming election. Australia is extremely important to Asia and the Pacific.
I hope Kevin Rudd would not be hard on himself. It isn’t him, it’s world politics!