As somebody who has paid many visits to Vietnam, I’d just like to add to this excellent review :
1) that Ho Chi Minh wrote Vietnam’s Declaration of Independence almost word-for-word as a copy of the American Declaration of Independence.
2) that even very shortly after re-unification in 1975, the so-called Vietnamese “Communists” – in fact : nationalists – were seeking to join the IMF and World Bank in 1977.
Both points 1) and 2) were blocked by America, in a betrayal of
America’s own ideals.
I suggest that far fewer families would be destroyed if someone actually did some verifiable research, and this govt would fall quickly without bloodshed.
Please expose the anti democratic yellows as well.
Because elections can still be easily be bought by wanna be president for lifers who want to use “double standards” to eliminate checks and balances and then use resulting concentrated “state power” to secure their monopolies (in telecoms for example) etc to maximize their personal benefit.
“The sociological basis of the red shirt’s appeal is not absolute poverty but relatively poverty.”
I believe this is a very important point. It is the relative gap between the richer and poorer segments of society which creates social discord. The problems associated with income disparity do not necessarily go away when absolute levels of poverty decline.
Many will accept that poverty is related to poor health and a range of social problems, but less widely understood is that, in the ‘developed’ world of wealthier countries, it is relative income disparities rather than average income levels which are important. In these countries the bigger the income gap between the top 20% and bottom 20% of the population, irrespective of average incomes, the higher the rates of both physical and mental illness, violence and crime in general, and the lower the levels of educational achievement and social harmony.
The studies, which support this and examine the likely reasons for it, are summarised by Kate Pickett and Richard Wilkinson in their book, “The Spirit Level”, which was published about a year ago. A good overview of the work can found in this interview with Kate Pickett: http://bigthink.com/ideas/18461
If we accept this research, then is just as much in the interests of the ‘richer’ as the ‘poorer’ to minimise relative income differences even after the war against poverty is over.
The life of poorer and rural Thais does and has compared very well amongst poor countries, a function of the climate, natural resources and land productivity and infrastructure that benefitted greatly from its military relationships during US anti-communist and Vietnam war operations.
Just a minor point, somewhat tangential to the authors main story:
I think the author meant that Thaksin of course did pay income tax on his telecommunications earnings but did not pay tax on the final sale which yielded a capital gain on transfer of shares. Share trades are tax exempt in Thailand for which many of the Thailand share traders are grateful.
A largely unrecognised aspect Of Thaksins sale of shares is that the value of his shares rose during the period he was PM almost exactly matching the average of all shares listed on the SET and substantially less than the gains enjoyed by for example those holding bank shares. Comments have been made that he would have been better off if he had sold his business when he became PM and bought bank shares instead.
Jornquest #1 and other Jorhnquest posts – you’re blaming all the bombings, etc. on the Red Shirts – but there’s good evidence suggesting there is more than one “hidden hand” at work here.
Eg. the firing of grenades into Silom from balconies on Chulalongkorn Hospital, confirmed by forensic expert Pornthip.
It does look very like there was an attempt to set-up the Red Shirts here, by a “third hand”.
Re :
Indeed, and none of these ‘accomplishments’ stand the test of close scrutiny any more than the ‘legendary jazz musician’ or indeed ’sufficiency economy theory’ do.
Oh come off it – I’ve bought a couple of HMK’s jazz albums, and they’re good stuff.
You obviously have no decent taste in jazz !
You seem to be implying in your last post that the extra-judicial killings that took place during Thaksin’s period in office were really not too bad. Don’t you think you might be guilty of blindly justifying the actions of those with whom you have aligned yourself? Would you be so morally flexible if it were Abhisit and the Democrats who had perpetrated these crimes?
I have to question your objectivity. I would like to see Thailand evolve politically and socially too, to the extent that elections no longer return vote buying gangsters keen to chow down on the juiciest infrastructure contacts from the government trough. I see no evidence that either side of the current political divide is likely to fulfill my wish in the near future. I believe that Chalerm Yubamrung is the current leader of the Puer Thai Party. I really don’t see how anyone can justify moral outrage in support of such a person. It certainly doesn’t indicate a desire to destroy the mafia on Thaksin’s part.
If rural Thailand owes Thaksin nothing, and if they are so educated and well-to-do, then why are the yellow/pink/multi/no-color shirts so afraid of elections?
I was involved in a number of capacities working with CDD (Ministry of INterior) in the mid-1980s. Much of this article is bull! Firstly, lets get it straight: Thaksin is alleged to have committed these bad deeds by his opposition. A biased court can find anyone guilty of anything: funny they have no evidence (yet)- after four years of painful and expensive investigations. The current regime and its freinds would like nothing better than to find him guilty of a real criminal offence. So until a fair and unbiased judiciary is in place – not the mob put there by the coup makers – then Thaksin can only be “alleged” -not ipso facto assumed to be guilty of crimes.
Now the argument; here I only draw on a few points:
every govt prior to Thaksin said they did not trust the villagers to manage their own funds and engender effective self-reliance or community empowerment; for a start there was a lack of seed funds percolating down to the villages; it was only Thaksin who took the theory and put it into practice. OTOP from the Japanese model also became a reality only after Thaksin came in that it started to work when funds were directed to the village “Or Por Tor” (sub-district administrative organisation): monies went to villages bypassing traditional government administrative structures (that is why Gov officials did not like this as it stopped their sources of extra-income generation). Hospital/primary health care? this started with the 30 Baht scheme under Thaksin whatever the prior rhetoric: you only have to ask any poor villager now what they had before and what Thaksin gave them to find the answer. They had nought- unless individuals/families were lucky enough to afford health care or happened across a sponsor to pay for them. The period mentioned post-1960s saw a rise in alternative health therapies/traditional medicine for this very reason. Farmers whom I worked with in the 1980s and in the following decade told me that they were scared/reluctant to go near hospitals because of kreng-jai/sense of crossing a social and cultural barrier /& affordability/and only as a last resort. The trouble is it was often only at a last resort and then too late for many… Addictions to common dumped cheap drugs & folk therapies re-appeared. No, it was thaksin who changed this. And we should give credit where credit is due and not fall prey to the resentment propaganda dispensed at random from certain interest groups for their own political interests.
anonymous for obvious reasons – “to say that the ‘violence is connected to the red shirts’ is like saying that the Tiananmen Massacre was connected to the protesters.”
Leah Hoyt – “I don’t know who is doing all the bombings, and I don’t think Fernquest does either. But it seems clear to me that the assumption that the reds are responsible for all of the violence is of an ilk with the claim that the protests are dangerous – they are propaganda.”
Uncertainty may be the only thing absolutely for certain but that doesn’t mean one cannot make informed guesses with a high degree of likelihood, guesses that are open to critical debate and at least potentially falsifiable unlike the academic production of Thongchai Winichakul published here recently which relies on some personal and impenetrable “germ” metaphor that makes it more difficult if not impossible to debate with him. (I would really like to see one critical review of his much vaunted book too).
I lived in northern Thailand for close to a decade and even personally visited the home of a paramilitary type once and witnessed him showing off grenades and explosives on the table while his kid ran around and played nearby. The same sort of people you find in the US reading Soldier of Fortune magazine with semiautomatic weapons hidden under their bed itching for an opportunity to engage in some secret mission. He told me the story of a military extrajudicial killing I knew about and how the army guy who shot the village headman in cold blood in front of his family bragged about it, everyone knew it, just to get a rise out of me. This guy was nice enough guy apart from his hobbies and the reason I met him was that he was a friend of the family.
Can this type of person be dangerous? Given the opportunity they can. Such mentally imbalanced people have been dangerous in the US (the anthrax scare, the Oklahoma bombings).
The standard left-leaning academic meme seems to be one of “over-reaction” without any comparison to similar situations in other countries (e.g. after anthrax scare in US). The situation has not blown up into a full-scale Beirut-like environment of killing, but a more relevant question is whether Beirut-like environments begin in situations like Bangkok right now.
There are so so many unreported undiscussed killings (often militia-connected) that I knew about during my life in northern Thailand (and hinted at in Desmond Ball’s work on militias) that your assertions of one massive information control conspiracy by a combined government and army seem outlandish.
Go live in northern Thailand and listen to the grapevine for a while. You will amass a long list of deaths and crime inadequately reported and never really explained. There is no critical media or local accountability there. (This was the major problem with the Andrew Walker article on village relocations that relied on media coverage where there simply is none, and BTW is not available almost anywhere in Thailand, just a public intellectual for elite who can afford Australian universities?).
Anyway, bye. Won’t stick around for the heaps of abuse the audience of this blog typical heaps upon any dissenting voice. Is this really the model of western freedom of thought and debate you wish to project?
These are the same people who would have told Rosa Park (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks) to sit down and shut up because she had it better than people in Africa.
The fact that the poor in Thailand are less poor than the poor in “the Philippines, India and much of South America”, has no bearing on their claim for equal rights and protection from the state as richer and better connected citizens.
The email ignores the impact of double standards and use of state power for personal benefit. Just because a Thai peasant is rich than his counterpart is no reason to let a kleptocratic army run a military dictatorship behind the scenes of a stage play democracy. I think we all know there is more at stake here than just money.
However, this whole debate is silly. Let’s settle this the way mature and functional countries have: an election.
An excellent point – I’m glad someone has at long last raised for serious discussion.
Thai people I’m somewhat close to fall into this social category.
I recently asked them “khun rak Thaksin baw?”
I.e “do you love/ are you loyal to Thaksin” in Isaarn dialect.
“Baw rak Thaksin” (do not love/ loyal to Thaksin ) came their reply.
I suggest that historically one of the major reasons the Thai Communist Party failed in Isaarn is that its’ increasingly Maoist ideology and programme was “anti-kulak.”
I.e. Stalinist and anti the relatively prosperous farmers, known in Russia as “kulaks”.
Rural Thailand – not least Isaarn – has long been “kulak” country.
[…] indicators between Bangkok (and its hinterland) and the rural northeast and north. The 2007 UNDP Human Development Report, despite its sufficiency economy nonsense, made this very […]
I would guess that making public all investigations into the crackdown on the PAD and the crackdown on the UDD would go pretty far towards revealing the truth. Having real “independent panels’ would also do the trick. Just imagine letting the government pick three people, the UDD pick three and three more from a vote.
Right now everything is completely secret – perhaps conducted entirely by Pornthip with a GT200.
Calling on bloggers to do extensive research projects to satisfy your whims is such a silly rhetorical trick, i am surprised you were even able to convince yourself it made sense.
Show us who is funding the reds – show records of donations. Show us it is not cynically funded and it really is really grassroots protests.
There is no need to task anonymous blogger with unearthing all of the information the government has kept secret or blocked. It is much, much easier just to reveal the secrets and stop the censorship.
Re: where are the students?
Nowadays, the Thai university students are by-and-large completely apolitical. They are also a group of complete “no-nothings” who seem incapable of expressing a political opinion, co-opted by the consumer oriented society. A product of the Thai educational system, perhaps. Maybe this is untrue up country in Khon Kaen, but it is certainly true of the students in Bangkok. I know of no passionate red-shirt or yellow-shirt students in Bangkok, and only a smattering of students supporting the “white shirts” or “peace group.” I did meet one uni student from Saraburi at the red shirt rally the first big weekend in March. She was a hotel-hospitality industry major, and her parents were both red shirt leaders in Saraburi.
However, even in the “student revolution” of 1973, it was not the university students who were on the front lines, except when they were caught in the Army shooting raids I saw at Thammasat and Chulalongkorn campuses, but the more “working class” technical college students who threw themselves at the Metropolitan Police HQ. So I predict, again, it will be the lowly tech students who will be the foot soldiers for the movement in the future should push come to shove.
Most of this piece was not bad, a bit on the rationalist side but not bad. Yet that last little poetry attempting to be some kind of wisdom was itself a broken mirror. What people “see” and what “is” need not be interpreted in liberal terms if it is a reality that complies with certain definitions of reality.
We can wax philosophical as we wish, but the reality that people live under must itself be reckoned with, not merely exalted or extolled.
Regarding thasin and drugwar. The only time this is ever trotted out by Thai nationals is when trying to undermine thaksin with foreigners.
In fact PAD leader Sondhi L. and his Manager newspaper were a cheering section during this time and I would say did more to inflame hatred of drug dealers than Thaksin.
“You are talking about Thailand of your own imagination”.
My compliments, what an exceptional quote. In my humble opinion I believe that the observation expressed is most prescient indeed. The author has been able to identify a neglected yet integral thread that runs throughout the ongoing socio-political drama currently gripping the Land of Smiles. What is it? Simply put, the concept of Thailand possesses countless definitions, it is both invented and assembled by its citizens, subjects, guests and addicts, its history is interpreted in many different ways, and a myriad of futures await it.
Permit me to explain.
How do the elites of Thailand view the country and their ordinate relationship over the masses? How do the masses of Thailand view the country and their subordinate relationship to the elites? How do the residents of Bangkok view the country and their relationship to their provincial cousins? How do the rural dwellers of Thailand view the country and their relationship to their Bangkok relatives? How does the present regime of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva view the country and its constitutionally mandated role to lead and to govern Thailand? How does the Peau Thai/UDD condominium view the country and its aspiration to lead and to govern Thailand?
In many respects the crisis affecting the country at the moment illustrates an intense competition between differing and multi-layered perceptions of what Thailand is and what it should be. A new dawn for Suvarnabhumi is on the cusp of rising and that cannot be disputed. Remember nothing lasts forever and no one is immortal. However, there is a visceral struggle (both figuratively and literally) being played out in this idyllic Southeast Asian country and it revolves around how people (Thais and foreigners alike) read the events and developments that have come to characterize Thailand’s Long Political Crisis since late 2005. I find it fascinating how the airwaves and the blogosphere demonstrate so clearly how there exists various parallel universes of the country. Essays, opinions, commentaries, news reports, interviews, press conferences, photos, videos and even Tweets communicate distinct interpretations and images of the same place – Suvarnabhumi. Some are true, many are deficient but all stem from and reflect one’s meticulously crafted “imagination” of what Thailand is today as well as what the present predicament means for the Thai body politic.
Often I ask myself the interrogatives, what does Thailand mean to me? And how much do my preconceptions of this country and its populace influence and determine my assessment of the current situation and my preference for one political grouping over another?
I have lived long enough in this tropical Shangri-La to know and to realize that Suvarnabhumi signifies different things to different people. Yet in every single instance there is a kernel of truth that resides in each imagined construct or empirical interpretation.
There are those who “see” Thailand as an earthly paradise of picturesque temples, pristine beaches, sun-drenched islands and smiling Siamese. Others “see” Thailand as a veritable palace of marketed hedonism of sex, drugs and frivolity.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a benevolent, enlightened Kingdom populated by obedient and respectful subjects. Others “see” Thailand as a quasi-feudalistic fiefdom of the elites populated by nascent citizens who are learning to practice democracy and to define the concept on their own terms.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a country hijacked by the mob and sliding towards civil war. Others “see” Thailand as having entered a period of delayed transition which will be punctuated by the ebb and flow of strategic tension.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a playground for the wealthy and privileged at the expense of the masses. Others “see” Thailand as a gilded cage for the exploited and often marginalized rural peasantry and urban poor.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a showcase of Southeast Asia’s remarkable economic progress and development (along with its attendant democratic “opening”) since the 1980s. Others “see” Thailand as an excellent example of the continuance of political authoritarianism, oligarchic control of the State, network capitalism, internal colonization, and patron-client relationships.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a nation with a storied past and with unique institutions that must be maintained and protected for the sake of stability and security. Others “see” Thailand as a land littered with myths, fairy tales, riddles, ghosts, and unspoken mysteries.
To be honest, I find Thailand to be a place which both suits and satisfies my needs and my wants. It is a country where smoke, mirrors and lies are time-honored tactics in the arena of politics. It is a country blessed by a docile and largely apathetic populace that accepts an unjust hierarchical structure. It is a country where personal bonds as well as associations are not based upon the preposterous notion of equality but rather upon karmic servitude. It is a country where bribery, extortion, graft, impunity, nepotism, cronyism, embezzlement, double standards, conflicts of interest and electoral fraud are observed religiously. It is a country where materialism has replaced the nonsensical teachings of the Lord Buddha as the new spiritual belief system (opium?) of the nation and shopping centers are the new temples of worship (opium dens?). It is a country where Isaan and Lanna yokels are looked down upon because of their ignorance, poverty, and hideous skin complexion. It is a country where the center of the mandala – Bangkok – leeches off the land and the toil of ordinary Thais sweating in the fields and factory floors and then spits out a few crumbs of munificence for them to consume. It is a country where the old aristocracy (bloated and aging) is au courant, the nouveau riche is admired, the robber barons are applauded, godfathers are respected and white skin adored. It is a country where power grows out of an intricate spoilage system and cash handouts. It is a country where appearances, matrimony and patronage determine status, financial reward and upward social mobility.
These are not criticisms but realities to be acknowledged and appreciated. I must confess that nowhere else in the world could a pauper like me have climbed up the socio-economic ladder so fast in such a short period of time. I have learned how to “play” the game of monopoly, how to cheat the system (e.g. non-payment of taxes), how to circumvent the law, how to earn more money by doing less, how to take advantage of provincial Thais and their urban LoSo kinfolk, and how to enjoy the fruits of network capitalism. Consequently, I “see” and “imagine” Thailand to be a Land of Opportunity.
Still, I embrace Siam for all her shortcomings, faults and sins. She makes me feel alive with her anarchy and chaos. Nonetheless, the thought of radical or democratic change taking place in Thailand has been interpreted by me to be a threat to my interests and that is one reason why I joined the PAD/Yellow Shirt camp. Our glorious and imagined past is what we stand for and what we defend.
Is Thailand in transition? Maybe. But a transition to what? Only time will tell.
By the way …..
Who controls the past now, controls the future
Who controls the present now, controls the past.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Review of Vietnam 1946: How the War Began
As somebody who has paid many visits to Vietnam, I’d just like to add to this excellent review :
1) that Ho Chi Minh wrote Vietnam’s Declaration of Independence almost word-for-word as a copy of the American Declaration of Independence.
2) that even very shortly after re-unification in 1975, the so-called Vietnamese “Communists” – in fact : nationalists – were seeking to join the IMF and World Bank in 1977.
Both points 1) and 2) were blocked by America, in a betrayal of
America’s own ideals.
Map of “Bangkok Dangerous”
I suggest that far fewer families would be destroyed if someone actually did some verifiable research, and this govt would fall quickly without bloodshed.
Please expose the anti democratic yellows as well.
But I guess that is just a whim to be dismissed.
The rebellion of Thailand’s middle-income peasants
Because elections can still be easily be bought by wanna be president for lifers who want to use “double standards” to eliminate checks and balances and then use resulting concentrated “state power” to secure their monopolies (in telecoms for example) etc to maximize their personal benefit.
The rebellion of Thailand’s middle-income peasants
“The sociological basis of the red shirt’s appeal is not absolute poverty but relatively poverty.”
I believe this is a very important point. It is the relative gap between the richer and poorer segments of society which creates social discord. The problems associated with income disparity do not necessarily go away when absolute levels of poverty decline.
Many will accept that poverty is related to poor health and a range of social problems, but less widely understood is that, in the ‘developed’ world of wealthier countries, it is relative income disparities rather than average income levels which are important. In these countries the bigger the income gap between the top 20% and bottom 20% of the population, irrespective of average incomes, the higher the rates of both physical and mental illness, violence and crime in general, and the lower the levels of educational achievement and social harmony.
The studies, which support this and examine the likely reasons for it, are summarised by Kate Pickett and Richard Wilkinson in their book, “The Spirit Level”, which was published about a year ago. A good overview of the work can found in this interview with Kate Pickett: http://bigthink.com/ideas/18461
If we accept this research, then is just as much in the interests of the ‘richer’ as the ‘poorer’ to minimise relative income differences even after the war against poverty is over.
The rebellion of Thailand’s middle-income peasants
interesting, deserves deeper study
The life of poorer and rural Thais does and has compared very well amongst poor countries, a function of the climate, natural resources and land productivity and infrastructure that benefitted greatly from its military relationships during US anti-communist and Vietnam war operations.
Just a minor point, somewhat tangential to the authors main story:
I think the author meant that Thaksin of course did pay income tax on his telecommunications earnings but did not pay tax on the final sale which yielded a capital gain on transfer of shares. Share trades are tax exempt in Thailand for which many of the Thailand share traders are grateful.
A largely unrecognised aspect Of Thaksins sale of shares is that the value of his shares rose during the period he was PM almost exactly matching the average of all shares listed on the SET and substantially less than the gains enjoyed by for example those holding bank shares. Comments have been made that he would have been better off if he had sold his business when he became PM and bought bank shares instead.
Map of “Bangkok Dangerous”
Jornquest #1 and other Jorhnquest posts – you’re blaming all the bombings, etc. on the Red Shirts – but there’s good evidence suggesting there is more than one “hidden hand” at work here.
Eg. the firing of grenades into Silom from balconies on Chulalongkorn Hospital, confirmed by forensic expert Pornthip.
It does look very like there was an attempt to set-up the Red Shirts here, by a “third hand”.
“Sufficiency democracy” – my contribution to political science vocabulary?
Anonymous #16 :
Re :
Indeed, and none of these ‘accomplishments’ stand the test of close scrutiny any more than the ‘legendary jazz musician’ or indeed ’sufficiency economy theory’ do.
Oh come off it – I’ve bought a couple of HMK’s jazz albums, and they’re good stuff.
You obviously have no decent taste in jazz !
Thongchai Winichakul on the Red “germs”
Jim,
You seem to be implying in your last post that the extra-judicial killings that took place during Thaksin’s period in office were really not too bad. Don’t you think you might be guilty of blindly justifying the actions of those with whom you have aligned yourself? Would you be so morally flexible if it were Abhisit and the Democrats who had perpetrated these crimes?
I have to question your objectivity. I would like to see Thailand evolve politically and socially too, to the extent that elections no longer return vote buying gangsters keen to chow down on the juiciest infrastructure contacts from the government trough. I see no evidence that either side of the current political divide is likely to fulfill my wish in the near future. I believe that Chalerm Yubamrung is the current leader of the Puer Thai Party. I really don’t see how anyone can justify moral outrage in support of such a person. It certainly doesn’t indicate a desire to destroy the mafia on Thaksin’s part.
The rebellion of Thailand’s middle-income peasants
If rural Thailand owes Thaksin nothing, and if they are so educated and well-to-do, then why are the yellow/pink/multi/no-color shirts so afraid of elections?
The rebellion of Thailand’s middle-income peasants
I was involved in a number of capacities working with CDD (Ministry of INterior) in the mid-1980s. Much of this article is bull! Firstly, lets get it straight: Thaksin is alleged to have committed these bad deeds by his opposition. A biased court can find anyone guilty of anything: funny they have no evidence (yet)- after four years of painful and expensive investigations. The current regime and its freinds would like nothing better than to find him guilty of a real criminal offence. So until a fair and unbiased judiciary is in place – not the mob put there by the coup makers – then Thaksin can only be “alleged” -not ipso facto assumed to be guilty of crimes.
Now the argument; here I only draw on a few points:
every govt prior to Thaksin said they did not trust the villagers to manage their own funds and engender effective self-reliance or community empowerment; for a start there was a lack of seed funds percolating down to the villages; it was only Thaksin who took the theory and put it into practice. OTOP from the Japanese model also became a reality only after Thaksin came in that it started to work when funds were directed to the village “Or Por Tor” (sub-district administrative organisation): monies went to villages bypassing traditional government administrative structures (that is why Gov officials did not like this as it stopped their sources of extra-income generation). Hospital/primary health care? this started with the 30 Baht scheme under Thaksin whatever the prior rhetoric: you only have to ask any poor villager now what they had before and what Thaksin gave them to find the answer. They had nought- unless individuals/families were lucky enough to afford health care or happened across a sponsor to pay for them. The period mentioned post-1960s saw a rise in alternative health therapies/traditional medicine for this very reason. Farmers whom I worked with in the 1980s and in the following decade told me that they were scared/reluctant to go near hospitals because of kreng-jai/sense of crossing a social and cultural barrier /& affordability/and only as a last resort. The trouble is it was often only at a last resort and then too late for many… Addictions to common dumped cheap drugs & folk therapies re-appeared. No, it was thaksin who changed this. And we should give credit where credit is due and not fall prey to the resentment propaganda dispensed at random from certain interest groups for their own political interests.
Map of “Bangkok Dangerous”
anonymous for obvious reasons – “to say that the ‘violence is connected to the red shirts’ is like saying that the Tiananmen Massacre was connected to the protesters.”
Leah Hoyt – “I don’t know who is doing all the bombings, and I don’t think Fernquest does either. But it seems clear to me that the assumption that the reds are responsible for all of the violence is of an ilk with the claim that the protests are dangerous – they are propaganda.”
Uncertainty may be the only thing absolutely for certain but that doesn’t mean one cannot make informed guesses with a high degree of likelihood, guesses that are open to critical debate and at least potentially falsifiable unlike the academic production of Thongchai Winichakul published here recently which relies on some personal and impenetrable “germ” metaphor that makes it more difficult if not impossible to debate with him. (I would really like to see one critical review of his much vaunted book too).
I lived in northern Thailand for close to a decade and even personally visited the home of a paramilitary type once and witnessed him showing off grenades and explosives on the table while his kid ran around and played nearby. The same sort of people you find in the US reading Soldier of Fortune magazine with semiautomatic weapons hidden under their bed itching for an opportunity to engage in some secret mission. He told me the story of a military extrajudicial killing I knew about and how the army guy who shot the village headman in cold blood in front of his family bragged about it, everyone knew it, just to get a rise out of me. This guy was nice enough guy apart from his hobbies and the reason I met him was that he was a friend of the family.
Can this type of person be dangerous? Given the opportunity they can. Such mentally imbalanced people have been dangerous in the US (the anthrax scare, the Oklahoma bombings).
The standard left-leaning academic meme seems to be one of “over-reaction” without any comparison to similar situations in other countries (e.g. after anthrax scare in US). The situation has not blown up into a full-scale Beirut-like environment of killing, but a more relevant question is whether Beirut-like environments begin in situations like Bangkok right now.
There are so so many unreported undiscussed killings (often militia-connected) that I knew about during my life in northern Thailand (and hinted at in Desmond Ball’s work on militias) that your assertions of one massive information control conspiracy by a combined government and army seem outlandish.
Go live in northern Thailand and listen to the grapevine for a while. You will amass a long list of deaths and crime inadequately reported and never really explained. There is no critical media or local accountability there. (This was the major problem with the Andrew Walker article on village relocations that relied on media coverage where there simply is none, and BTW is not available almost anywhere in Thailand, just a public intellectual for elite who can afford Australian universities?).
Anyway, bye. Won’t stick around for the heaps of abuse the audience of this blog typical heaps upon any dissenting voice. Is this really the model of western freedom of thought and debate you wish to project?
The rebellion of Thailand’s middle-income peasants
These are the same people who would have told Rosa Park (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks) to sit down and shut up because she had it better than people in Africa.
The fact that the poor in Thailand are less poor than the poor in “the Philippines, India and much of South America”, has no bearing on their claim for equal rights and protection from the state as richer and better connected citizens.
The email ignores the impact of double standards and use of state power for personal benefit. Just because a Thai peasant is rich than his counterpart is no reason to let a kleptocratic army run a military dictatorship behind the scenes of a stage play democracy. I think we all know there is more at stake here than just money.
However, this whole debate is silly. Let’s settle this the way mature and functional countries have: an election.
The rebellion of Thailand’s middle-income peasants
An excellent point – I’m glad someone has at long last raised for serious discussion.
Thai people I’m somewhat close to fall into this social category.
I recently asked them “khun rak Thaksin baw?”
I.e “do you love/ are you loyal to Thaksin” in Isaarn dialect.
“Baw rak Thaksin” (do not love/ loyal to Thaksin ) came their reply.
I suggest that historically one of the major reasons the Thai Communist Party failed in Isaarn is that its’ increasingly Maoist ideology and programme was “anti-kulak.”
I.e. Stalinist and anti the relatively prosperous farmers, known in Russia as “kulaks”.
Rural Thailand – not least Isaarn – has long been “kulak” country.
The scourge of Burma, Part 5
I have read all of the stories from part 1 to 6
non-stop, they are excellent stories indeed.
Sufficiency economy and human development
[…] indicators between Bangkok (and its hinterland) and the rural northeast and north. The 2007 UNDP Human Development Report, despite its sufficiency economy nonsense, made this very […]
Map of “Bangkok Dangerous”
Here we go again,
I would guess that making public all investigations into the crackdown on the PAD and the crackdown on the UDD would go pretty far towards revealing the truth. Having real “independent panels’ would also do the trick. Just imagine letting the government pick three people, the UDD pick three and three more from a vote.
Right now everything is completely secret – perhaps conducted entirely by Pornthip with a GT200.
Calling on bloggers to do extensive research projects to satisfy your whims is such a silly rhetorical trick, i am surprised you were even able to convince yourself it made sense.
There is no need to task anonymous blogger with unearthing all of the information the government has kept secret or blocked. It is much, much easier just to reveal the secrets and stop the censorship.
Map of “Bangkok Dangerous”
Re: where are the students?
Nowadays, the Thai university students are by-and-large completely apolitical. They are also a group of complete “no-nothings” who seem incapable of expressing a political opinion, co-opted by the consumer oriented society. A product of the Thai educational system, perhaps. Maybe this is untrue up country in Khon Kaen, but it is certainly true of the students in Bangkok. I know of no passionate red-shirt or yellow-shirt students in Bangkok, and only a smattering of students supporting the “white shirts” or “peace group.” I did meet one uni student from Saraburi at the red shirt rally the first big weekend in March. She was a hotel-hospitality industry major, and her parents were both red shirt leaders in Saraburi.
However, even in the “student revolution” of 1973, it was not the university students who were on the front lines, except when they were caught in the Army shooting raids I saw at Thammasat and Chulalongkorn campuses, but the more “working class” technical college students who threw themselves at the Metropolitan Police HQ. So I predict, again, it will be the lowly tech students who will be the foot soldiers for the movement in the future should push come to shove.
Thongchai Winichakul on the Red “germs”
Most of this piece was not bad, a bit on the rationalist side but not bad. Yet that last little poetry attempting to be some kind of wisdom was itself a broken mirror. What people “see” and what “is” need not be interpreted in liberal terms if it is a reality that complies with certain definitions of reality.
We can wax philosophical as we wish, but the reality that people live under must itself be reckoned with, not merely exalted or extolled.
Thongchai Winichakul on the Red “germs”
Regarding thasin and drugwar. The only time this is ever trotted out by Thai nationals is when trying to undermine thaksin with foreigners.
In fact PAD leader Sondhi L. and his Manager newspaper were a cheering section during this time and I would say did more to inflame hatred of drug dealers than Thaksin.
Thongchai Winichakul on the Red “germs”
“You are talking about Thailand of your own imagination”.
My compliments, what an exceptional quote. In my humble opinion I believe that the observation expressed is most prescient indeed. The author has been able to identify a neglected yet integral thread that runs throughout the ongoing socio-political drama currently gripping the Land of Smiles. What is it? Simply put, the concept of Thailand possesses countless definitions, it is both invented and assembled by its citizens, subjects, guests and addicts, its history is interpreted in many different ways, and a myriad of futures await it.
Permit me to explain.
How do the elites of Thailand view the country and their ordinate relationship over the masses? How do the masses of Thailand view the country and their subordinate relationship to the elites? How do the residents of Bangkok view the country and their relationship to their provincial cousins? How do the rural dwellers of Thailand view the country and their relationship to their Bangkok relatives? How does the present regime of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva view the country and its constitutionally mandated role to lead and to govern Thailand? How does the Peau Thai/UDD condominium view the country and its aspiration to lead and to govern Thailand?
In many respects the crisis affecting the country at the moment illustrates an intense competition between differing and multi-layered perceptions of what Thailand is and what it should be. A new dawn for Suvarnabhumi is on the cusp of rising and that cannot be disputed. Remember nothing lasts forever and no one is immortal. However, there is a visceral struggle (both figuratively and literally) being played out in this idyllic Southeast Asian country and it revolves around how people (Thais and foreigners alike) read the events and developments that have come to characterize Thailand’s Long Political Crisis since late 2005. I find it fascinating how the airwaves and the blogosphere demonstrate so clearly how there exists various parallel universes of the country. Essays, opinions, commentaries, news reports, interviews, press conferences, photos, videos and even Tweets communicate distinct interpretations and images of the same place – Suvarnabhumi. Some are true, many are deficient but all stem from and reflect one’s meticulously crafted “imagination” of what Thailand is today as well as what the present predicament means for the Thai body politic.
Often I ask myself the interrogatives, what does Thailand mean to me? And how much do my preconceptions of this country and its populace influence and determine my assessment of the current situation and my preference for one political grouping over another?
I have lived long enough in this tropical Shangri-La to know and to realize that Suvarnabhumi signifies different things to different people. Yet in every single instance there is a kernel of truth that resides in each imagined construct or empirical interpretation.
There are those who “see” Thailand as an earthly paradise of picturesque temples, pristine beaches, sun-drenched islands and smiling Siamese. Others “see” Thailand as a veritable palace of marketed hedonism of sex, drugs and frivolity.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a benevolent, enlightened Kingdom populated by obedient and respectful subjects. Others “see” Thailand as a quasi-feudalistic fiefdom of the elites populated by nascent citizens who are learning to practice democracy and to define the concept on their own terms.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a country hijacked by the mob and sliding towards civil war. Others “see” Thailand as having entered a period of delayed transition which will be punctuated by the ebb and flow of strategic tension.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a playground for the wealthy and privileged at the expense of the masses. Others “see” Thailand as a gilded cage for the exploited and often marginalized rural peasantry and urban poor.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a showcase of Southeast Asia’s remarkable economic progress and development (along with its attendant democratic “opening”) since the 1980s. Others “see” Thailand as an excellent example of the continuance of political authoritarianism, oligarchic control of the State, network capitalism, internal colonization, and patron-client relationships.
There are those who “see” Thailand as a nation with a storied past and with unique institutions that must be maintained and protected for the sake of stability and security. Others “see” Thailand as a land littered with myths, fairy tales, riddles, ghosts, and unspoken mysteries.
To be honest, I find Thailand to be a place which both suits and satisfies my needs and my wants. It is a country where smoke, mirrors and lies are time-honored tactics in the arena of politics. It is a country blessed by a docile and largely apathetic populace that accepts an unjust hierarchical structure. It is a country where personal bonds as well as associations are not based upon the preposterous notion of equality but rather upon karmic servitude. It is a country where bribery, extortion, graft, impunity, nepotism, cronyism, embezzlement, double standards, conflicts of interest and electoral fraud are observed religiously. It is a country where materialism has replaced the nonsensical teachings of the Lord Buddha as the new spiritual belief system (opium?) of the nation and shopping centers are the new temples of worship (opium dens?). It is a country where Isaan and Lanna yokels are looked down upon because of their ignorance, poverty, and hideous skin complexion. It is a country where the center of the mandala – Bangkok – leeches off the land and the toil of ordinary Thais sweating in the fields and factory floors and then spits out a few crumbs of munificence for them to consume. It is a country where the old aristocracy (bloated and aging) is au courant, the nouveau riche is admired, the robber barons are applauded, godfathers are respected and white skin adored. It is a country where power grows out of an intricate spoilage system and cash handouts. It is a country where appearances, matrimony and patronage determine status, financial reward and upward social mobility.
These are not criticisms but realities to be acknowledged and appreciated. I must confess that nowhere else in the world could a pauper like me have climbed up the socio-economic ladder so fast in such a short period of time. I have learned how to “play” the game of monopoly, how to cheat the system (e.g. non-payment of taxes), how to circumvent the law, how to earn more money by doing less, how to take advantage of provincial Thais and their urban LoSo kinfolk, and how to enjoy the fruits of network capitalism. Consequently, I “see” and “imagine” Thailand to be a Land of Opportunity.
Still, I embrace Siam for all her shortcomings, faults and sins. She makes me feel alive with her anarchy and chaos. Nonetheless, the thought of radical or democratic change taking place in Thailand has been interpreted by me to be a threat to my interests and that is one reason why I joined the PAD/Yellow Shirt camp. Our glorious and imagined past is what we stand for and what we defend.
Is Thailand in transition? Maybe. But a transition to what? Only time will tell.
By the way …..
Who controls the past now, controls the future
Who controls the present now, controls the past.