How about simply recognizing leaders who have actually been elected.
Instead of upholding the monarchy, which doesn’t need to be upheld, but constrained, perhaps both parties could agree to simply uphold the sovereignty of the people. Perhaps they could agree to develop democratic institutions like the judiciary. While they’re at it they could do away with lese majeste and the central place the monarchy plays in the political indoctrination of students in schools at the expense of the role of the Thai people in forging the nation of Thailand.
Instead of government programs to ensure the public welfare, why don’t both parties simply agree to empower the masses with incentives to become financially independent and simply get out of their way.
Interesting to read this and to feel the paternalism in it. Is there anything in this statement that points to the most important issue: the development of democracy in Thailand?
StanG – I’ve been reading the comments and just had to comment on your last one. “Among those same groups there are about as many yellows as reds.”
If you are talking Urban Bangkok/South maybe you are correct but if you are talking North and the Northeast you are very much mistaken.
Udon Thani with a population of 1.5 million has 400,000 registered UDD members that’s 30% of the population not even factoring in the red leaning people and groups which are huge. Probably 70% is red leaning. Khon Kean, Nong Khai, etc – would be a similar split.
I spent the entire month of March canvasing the provinces of the North for a feature I was going to do. I drove 4500 Km. In that time I did not have one person tell me they were against the reds. Not one, Stan. I did however talk to a lot of people who voted Democrat previously but would not vote for them again.
I think both Stan and the Government have grossly underestimated or just disregarded the fact that there is huge support of the Reds ideas and actions by a vast majority of the people in the North and Northeast.
1. uphold the monarchy
the reputation of the monarchy is very poor primarily because its name has been used as cover by the military, the PAD and the government all of whom have been engaged in criminal acts against the people of Thailand and refugees
the reputation of the monarchy will not be upheld by suppressing truthful discussion rather will suffer further if the current lese majeste suppression is pursued
2. the current government which is accountable only to the military should act as a caretaker waiting for a government legitimately elected by the people to introduce policies with the authority of and accountable to the people
3. the government admits it has control of the media, it would be interesting to discover what they mean by constructive (of the Democrat point of view), why not free?
4. independent review? no such thing in Thailand, perhaps representatives of all sides reporting separately to parliament
5. do they mean revert to the 1997 peoples constitution? again caretaker role pending democratically elected government
JFL said “They came for the red shirts, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a red shirt… That seems to be exactly what’s going down in the city of angels”
Unfortunately, I think it’s even worse than that JFL.
the current regime has a record of blatant deceit, double standards, lies and misrepresentation; in my view such apparent “compromises” forced on the illict alliance need to be taken with caution (but see the full text- who is taking the blame?)
“ …this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. ”
–Orwell, 1984
“A continuous alteration of the past”? Will this entirely uncorroborated version of events now become ‘fact’ in the psyche of the disciples of all that is ‘red ‘?
1.) Shooting M79 from the fifth floor of Chulalongkorn Hospital will NEVER hit near the Silom station or behind.
Simply not possible because of the range and the angle. Also a building in the way where you have to shoot over that building and than your out of range. It would hit the building and not the street or station.
2.) Soldiers also provided security for the hospital, but never entered it. In the Hospital where several so called “important people” and there was fear the hospital could be a target.
The eye witness is really questionable. Pictures ? Film ? No, just “I have seen” and thats not enough.
3.) Storming a hospital is even in a real war a shameful thing. Now it is ok because red shirts did think there are troops in ?
No apologize needed afterwards. Done is done and it was nothing else than a crime.
4.) Chulalongkorn hospital did never refuse any patient. If so please show some proof. Oh, no proof or picture ? Than shut up and stop telling things not true.
I was there and didn’t see such a sign and media didn’t report that too, so what. Looks like someone is creating things that would connect the hospital to the PAD and than justify the actions of the red shirts.
Nope, the red shirt action is with NOTHING to justify, not even in a real war. Get that now ?
5.) The demonstration is completely wrong. The government is elected and has the right to be in power. In every democratic country this government would be the rightful one without question, but not for the red shirts.
This shows that they doesn’t know anything about democracy and the leaders lie to the protesters, telling them that Abhisit was placed by military as there media does or did.
Besides that, did you notice that Thailand did well during the crisis where other country’s had problems ? Or did you notice the help from the government for the rice harvesters ?
Missing some true report about that on this page here.
5.) Distorted, Disgraced and sometimes I find it even disgusting here.
If something is opposite a government you can find it here. If it is in favour, nothing to find.
That’s biased and disgusts me.
“The current source of “billions seized in UK” story is Nation’s Thanong. He has incorporated it into a wider narrative of Thaksin’s financial dealings with great many details.
Thanong has never disclosed his sources but they are definitely not that confused arabiannews editor.”
Definitely not? Hmmm…..
“By Thanong Khanthong
blog.nationgroup.com/thanong
Published on December 19, 2008
Arabianbusiness.com has recently revealed that the UK froze Thaksin’s assets amounting to $4 billion. “The UK froze his reputed $4 billion of assets, forcing him to sell Manchester City to Abu Dhabi’s Sheikh Mansour. To add to his troubles, his UK visa was revoked – oh, and his wife divorced him last week,” the Arabianbusiness report said.
Strangely enough, nobody followed up on this story to either confirm or deny whether Thaksin’s $4 billion has been frozen by the British authorities.”
“a wider narrative of Thaksin’s financial dealings with great many details”? e.g.
“Down to his last $500 million?
By THANONG KHANTHONG
December 26, 2008
…….’So, in brief, his net worth has declined from a notional figure of US$5 billion to the present value of US$500 million,’ said the international financier, who asked not to be named…….. [oops – here comes that “confused” Arab again] Earlier, Arabian-business.com (see the link http://www.arabianbusiness.com/539714-catch-me-if-you-can) reported that the UK has frozen $4 billion of Thaksin’s assets. ‘The UK froze his reputed $4bn of assets, forcing him to sell Manchester City to Abu Dhabi’s Sheikh Mansour. To add to his troubles, his UK visa was revoked – oh, and his wife divorced him last week,’ the Arabianbusiness report said……A Thai businessman by the name of ‘Phairoj P’ has been acting as a front man on Thaksin’s behalf in making the dubious money transfers into the UK. ‘Phairoj was a surrogate in helping Thaksin to acquire the football club. When only 10,000 pounds of (Bt508,000) was transferred into Phairoj’s bank account, the UK authorities asked him where the money came from but he could not give a satisfactory answer. That led the UK authorities to mount a series of assets freezes. Phairoj, too, is facing trouble with the UK authorities,’ said a local banker, who asked not to be named…..’My good guess is that he has only in the Bt10-billion range left. So he is rather desperate to try to get hold of his frozen assets in Thailand. But that will not be easy now,’ said a local money manager who has extensive experience in international finance.“ [and who one assumes also “asked not to be named”]
Having (yes – definitely) sourced his story from arabianbusiness.com and having never acknowledged the author’s withdrawal of it, having peppered that withdrawn story with (cough) “details” from sources “who asked not to be named”….. well, by February this year, Thanong is reduced to:
“…..In late 2008, it was reported that the UK had frozen $4.2 billion of his assets. However, the UK government has not confirmed or denied this claim………. It is believed that the UK authorities have frozen about US$4.2 billion of Thaksin’s assets and might have already seized this huge amount……”
“it was reported that”, “It is believed that”, “might”….. Yep, that’s definitely a man who’s sure of his facts, isn’t it?
For light relief from all this, I’d say NotTheNation get it about right:
“We could lose up to 75% of our content if it’s no longer feasible to just say that the Economist, Wall Street Journal, Amnesty International, The World Court, the CIA, and the British Parliament are all on Thaksin’s payroll,” said Thanong Khantong, editor of the Nation. “I might actually have to start looking up facts. It would ruin me.”
Finally, on a scale of 1-10 for credibility, where does one put a Thanong pronouncement – above or below a StanG report of a “rumor running around Chatuchak”?
Looking again I notice graph 1 shows GDP/worker figures in both categories rising to 1997 – the year of the crash and then eventually rising again as the economy recovers.
The percentage growth in the agricultural sector is much greater than the industrial sector to apparently 5 times what it was 20 years ago.
Does this mean anything? Let’s go back 200 years and a bit more before the industrial revolution. A visiting US lecturer at Payap University showed GDP figures from C18th where Germany and China had roughly the same per capita GDP. GDP’s which, in a fashion fed, housed and clothed the people of the countries concerned.
I would say that by and large Thais today and 20 years ago are better fed, housed and clothed than the Germans and Chinese of old. They own their own houses in the countryside and mostly have a TV, mobile phone & motor bike at least. What is more their children are not deprived of holiday amusement because the Red Shirts are blocking access to the malls, unlike the wretched children of Bangkok.
So I suggest this discussion about GDP per worker is about the extent to which we are part of the World economy of over production, waste and environmental destruction.
Being kept down on the farm means there is somebody to look after the land, if and when people decide that is desirable and that when the economies of the World tumble because the price of oil soars or we decide not to destroy all by burning fossil fuels, Thailand may be more resilient than most.
Remember the song “U ban nok … mai dong ha ngan…” ?
jonfernquest -The idea that the killings were some kind of thought-virus that Thaksin spread in Thais is ludicrous. The policy was enthusiastically supported with little internal opposition, and the only reason it stopped was because foreign governments were expressing concern and the country was getting a black eye. The war on drugs is one of the few areas in which the yellows and reds were in agreement. By the way, Buddhism has about as much affect on Thai attitudes towards violence as Christianity does on so-called Christians–in other words very little. Thailand has long had a very high murder and violent crime rate, long preceding Thaksin’s ascent to power.
Forgive me for adding a few more words of emphasis.
I think the ‘nak-leng’ analogy, while very illuminating, also has important limits. It’s illuminating, I believe, on political culture – the way the leaders talk to enemy, women, gays etc. and certain of their behaviors, action – reactions, which Thongchai describes vividly. But these people, the ‘core leaders’, not to mention Thaksin and his circles (civilian and police/military), are also politicians and (new) elite, people who have interests and power to protect and to grasp. They are also the kind of people who, in power, show quite little regards for the ‘cost’ of achieving something in terms of human lives (think of ‘war on drugs’ or ‘the South’). It would be, as I already said, quite a miracle if these people’s thinking suddenly change. And that’s the gist of my criticism of the Reds leadership tactical thinking.
One particular reason why I like Thongchai’s nak-leng passages is, a few weeks ago, a friend of ours, the famous literary critic, Chusak Phattharakunwanit, wrote a letter to me, in which he described in vivid ‘montage’ of everyday-life examples, the kind of culture among the Red Shirts mass, of which we, former left-wing activists are not familiar. The kind of culture that, under some circumstances, could turn to rightist as well as ‘leftist’ direction. I urged Chusak to expand it into an article. His and the part of Thongchai’s article on the nak-leng culture would compliment each other nicely.
We do not know how accurately the writer is reporting, or the extent to which his informants were telling the truth, or whether indeed the writer is actually one of the hospitalized officers pursuing his own agenda. But in any case, the article gives credence–and detail–to the suspicion that part of what is happening involves factional disputes within the military. We may suppose that, in addition to retirement and promotion issues, the crisis also involves behind-the-scenes disputes over larger issues such as control of the drug, prostitution, gambling etc. industries, involving multiple branches of the military, the police and other traditional power brokers. All this is interleaved with conflicts among the military, the bureaucracy, which runs the country day-to-day and the government trying to be more than the window-dressing of modern democracy for a mafiaesque state.
Another layer of power relations that I am more familiar with, and which gets scant mention in either the Thai or English press has to do with the non-bank money lenders and large landholders. In Isan where I spend a great deal of time, the farmers are deeply in debt to non-bank lenders who hold title deeds to their land for security. I’ve been in my village when the mayor announced over the village PA system that a lender was available to make loans with which to make payments on Thaksin’s “micro-credit” loans–and as long as you’re borrowing you might as well borrow a bit more (and put a bit more land in hock). That, of course, is related to the large landholders who gobble up the foreclosed farmland when payments finally cannot be made. All that, in turn, is deeply involved with the local patronage hierarchies and, in turn, local government and bureaucracy. The current government is moving to clamp down on loan sharking–delaying payment deadlines on Thaksin-era government loans and moving “non-system loans” to legitimate bank loans with reasonable interest rates. It is also moving to tax excessively large land holdings. It is thus in the interests of the local power brokers to force the government to resign before it can cut into their cash flow. It would thus be in the interest of the farmers to support the current government. But: most of the farmers I know believe, quite seriously and with a kind of animistic faith, that when Thaksin comes back, he will pay off all loans out of his own pocket and bring prosperity to all.
It’s all terribly complex and because there has never been public discourse on and among the power blocks and factions there is no overall picture and no arena for negotiation. No tradition of accommodation and compromise–thus a military coup every ten or so years. What is different now, is that the population at large has gotten involved in the conflicts–yellow shirts, red shirts, multi-colored shirts–and even if they are being used as pawns in struggles among the power-elites, they are bringing their own needs, however poorly articulated, to the battle. I suspect they will not for long defer to whatever resolution the old power blocks make among themselves, but will continue to assert themselves. In short, the crisis is long term. My hope is that arenas will emerge for discourse, deliberation. For verbal combat. For the emergence of a democratic society.
Stephen A. Evans; Note: I speak and read Thai fluently and have some facility in the Isan-Lao language.
Glad someone found that Solzhenitsyn quote useful. Some more qualified Thai scholar than I should perhaps develop the related ‘Tito’ theme – given that you-know-who gave Tito some literary attention some years back. The obvious point being that the longer a Tito figure keeps the lid on the pot of discord, the bigger the eventual mess when said figure departs.
As for K. Visarut, sooner or later the lid has to come off the pot. The longer this takes, the more the cooking is going to smell like something Fu-Fu did under the sofa and the worse things will be.
I wouldn’t assume that everybody here wants to fire the entire kitchen staff. Most of us here are rather more nuanced than that and don’t necessarily believe in throwing the baby out with the bath water.
These clips have poor sound quality. If you know any SABM members please let them know. Thanks once again for your enthusiastic reporting. What has been going on in Malaysia gave me a few things to think about. We can always learn from other people’s experience if we think hard and observe with foresight. I’m not a Muslim, and nor do I come from the south of Thailand; but I have found Malaysia- Mahatirism particularly- to be a source of policy thinking for the Thai South.
“A very important note of fact: perhaps the most distinguished patient at the Chula Hospital at the moment is the Supreme Patriarch, who has been there for the past few years. He refused to be moved….”
Just by this paragraph, we should know that the author either does not really know or pretend to not know so as to advance his biased interpretation. It is well known for several years that the Supreme Patriarch suffers Alzheimer Disease at the advanced stage. How could you see that he refused to be moved when he does not know where he is now?
If you care to make a reserch a little, during Thaksin time, the govt had to appoint an acting Supreme Patriarch but was opposed by some monks especially Luang Ta Maha Bua and his followers. Chulalongkorn doctors had to give an honest opinion that the Supreme Patriarch could not function before Luang Ta and his followers backed down.
It was politics as usual even among the high ranking monks, trying to grab and hold on to worldly power.
So be careful if you read his opinion. If a well-known fact is twisted, what else?
StanG – The same Thanong, the man who said that Thaksin was seriously ill one day and then the next day Thaksin was found in Montenegro sipping tea?…… some credible guy we have here.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Abhisit’s offer
Here are the names of leaders that I would like to see representing people in the national reform.
1. Giles Ji Ungpakorn
2. Jakrapop Penkair
3. Major General Khattiya Sawadipol (Sae Daeng)
Abhisit’s offer
How about simply recognizing leaders who have actually been elected.
Instead of upholding the monarchy, which doesn’t need to be upheld, but constrained, perhaps both parties could agree to simply uphold the sovereignty of the people. Perhaps they could agree to develop democratic institutions like the judiciary. While they’re at it they could do away with lese majeste and the central place the monarchy plays in the political indoctrination of students in schools at the expense of the role of the Thai people in forging the nation of Thailand.
Instead of government programs to ensure the public welfare, why don’t both parties simply agree to empower the masses with incentives to become financially independent and simply get out of their way.
Interesting to read this and to feel the paternalism in it. Is there anything in this statement that points to the most important issue: the development of democracy in Thailand?
Thongchai Winichakul on the Red “germs”
StanG – I’ve been reading the comments and just had to comment on your last one. “Among those same groups there are about as many yellows as reds.”
If you are talking Urban Bangkok/South maybe you are correct but if you are talking North and the Northeast you are very much mistaken.
Udon Thani with a population of 1.5 million has 400,000 registered UDD members that’s 30% of the population not even factoring in the red leaning people and groups which are huge. Probably 70% is red leaning. Khon Kean, Nong Khai, etc – would be a similar split.
I spent the entire month of March canvasing the provinces of the North for a feature I was going to do. I drove 4500 Km. In that time I did not have one person tell me they were against the reds. Not one, Stan. I did however talk to a lot of people who voted Democrat previously but would not vote for them again.
I think both Stan and the Government have grossly underestimated or just disregarded the fact that there is huge support of the Reds ideas and actions by a vast majority of the people in the North and Northeast.
Abhisit’s offer
1. uphold the monarchy
the reputation of the monarchy is very poor primarily because its name has been used as cover by the military, the PAD and the government all of whom have been engaged in criminal acts against the people of Thailand and refugees
the reputation of the monarchy will not be upheld by suppressing truthful discussion rather will suffer further if the current lese majeste suppression is pursued
2. the current government which is accountable only to the military should act as a caretaker waiting for a government legitimately elected by the people to introduce policies with the authority of and accountable to the people
3. the government admits it has control of the media, it would be interesting to discover what they mean by constructive (of the Democrat point of view), why not free?
4. independent review? no such thing in Thailand, perhaps representatives of all sides reporting separately to parliament
5. do they mean revert to the 1997 peoples constitution? again caretaker role pending democratically elected government
Thongchai Winichakul on the Red “germs”
JFL said “They came for the red shirts, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a red shirt… That seems to be exactly what’s going down in the city of angels”
Unfortunately, I think it’s even worse than that JFL.
Abhisit’s offer
It doesnt sound like that in Thai…..
Abhisit’s offer
the current regime has a record of blatant deceit, double standards, lies and misrepresentation; in my view such apparent “compromises” forced on the illict alliance need to be taken with caution (but see the full text- who is taking the blame?)
Student leaders summoned
[…] Saturday I was alerted to a tweet by a former colleague of mine and at the same time to an article by New Manadala, saying […]
Chulalongkorn Hospital – an alternative account
Blackwhite is defined as follows:
“ …this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. ”
–Orwell, 1984
“A continuous alteration of the past”? Will this entirely uncorroborated version of events now become ‘fact’ in the psyche of the disciples of all that is ‘red ‘?
Chulalongkorn Hospital – an alternative account
1.) Shooting M79 from the fifth floor of Chulalongkorn Hospital will NEVER hit near the Silom station or behind.
Simply not possible because of the range and the angle. Also a building in the way where you have to shoot over that building and than your out of range. It would hit the building and not the street or station.
2.) Soldiers also provided security for the hospital, but never entered it. In the Hospital where several so called “important people” and there was fear the hospital could be a target.
The eye witness is really questionable. Pictures ? Film ? No, just “I have seen” and thats not enough.
3.) Storming a hospital is even in a real war a shameful thing. Now it is ok because red shirts did think there are troops in ?
No apologize needed afterwards. Done is done and it was nothing else than a crime.
4.) Chulalongkorn hospital did never refuse any patient. If so please show some proof. Oh, no proof or picture ? Than shut up and stop telling things not true.
I was there and didn’t see such a sign and media didn’t report that too, so what. Looks like someone is creating things that would connect the hospital to the PAD and than justify the actions of the red shirts.
Nope, the red shirt action is with NOTHING to justify, not even in a real war. Get that now ?
5.) The demonstration is completely wrong. The government is elected and has the right to be in power. In every democratic country this government would be the rightful one without question, but not for the red shirts.
This shows that they doesn’t know anything about democracy and the leaders lie to the protesters, telling them that Abhisit was placed by military as there media does or did.
Besides that, did you notice that Thailand did well during the crisis where other country’s had problems ? Or did you notice the help from the government for the rice harvesters ?
Missing some true report about that on this page here.
5.) Distorted, Disgraced and sometimes I find it even disgusting here.
If something is opposite a government you can find it here. If it is in favour, nothing to find.
That’s biased and disgusts me.
Interview with Thaksin: “I am speaking to you from heaven”
c15
“The current source of “billions seized in UK” story is Nation’s Thanong. He has incorporated it into a wider narrative of Thaksin’s financial dealings with great many details.
Thanong has never disclosed his sources but they are definitely not that confused arabiannews editor.”
Definitely not? Hmmm…..
“By Thanong Khanthong
blog.nationgroup.com/thanong
Published on December 19, 2008
Arabianbusiness.com has recently revealed that the UK froze Thaksin’s assets amounting to $4 billion. “The UK froze his reputed $4 billion of assets, forcing him to sell Manchester City to Abu Dhabi’s Sheikh Mansour. To add to his troubles, his UK visa was revoked – oh, and his wife divorced him last week,” the Arabianbusiness report said.
Strangely enough, nobody followed up on this story to either confirm or deny whether Thaksin’s $4 billion has been frozen by the British authorities.”
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/12/19/opinion/opinion_30091373.php
“a wider narrative of Thaksin’s financial dealings with great many details”? e.g.
“Down to his last $500 million?
By THANONG KHANTHONG
December 26, 2008
…….’So, in brief, his net worth has declined from a notional figure of US$5 billion to the present value of US$500 million,’ said the international financier, who asked not to be named…….. [oops – here comes that “confused” Arab again] Earlier, Arabian-business.com (see the link http://www.arabianbusiness.com/539714-catch-me-if-you-can) reported that the UK has frozen $4 billion of Thaksin’s assets. ‘The UK froze his reputed $4bn of assets, forcing him to sell Manchester City to Abu Dhabi’s Sheikh Mansour. To add to his troubles, his UK visa was revoked – oh, and his wife divorced him last week,’ the Arabianbusiness report said……A Thai businessman by the name of ‘Phairoj P’ has been acting as a front man on Thaksin’s behalf in making the dubious money transfers into the UK. ‘Phairoj was a surrogate in helping Thaksin to acquire the football club. When only 10,000 pounds of (Bt508,000) was transferred into Phairoj’s bank account, the UK authorities asked him where the money came from but he could not give a satisfactory answer. That led the UK authorities to mount a series of assets freezes. Phairoj, too, is facing trouble with the UK authorities,’ said a local banker, who asked not to be named…..’My good guess is that he has only in the Bt10-billion range left. So he is rather desperate to try to get hold of his frozen assets in Thailand. But that will not be easy now,’ said a local money manager who has extensive experience in international finance.“ [and who one assumes also “asked not to be named”]
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/12/26/politics/politics_30091929.php
Having (yes – definitely) sourced his story from arabianbusiness.com and having never acknowledged the author’s withdrawal of it, having peppered that withdrawn story with (cough) “details” from sources “who asked not to be named”….. well, by February this year, Thanong is reduced to:
“…..In late 2008, it was reported that the UK had frozen $4.2 billion of his assets. However, the UK government has not confirmed or denied this claim………. It is believed that the UK authorities have frozen about US$4.2 billion of Thaksin’s assets and might have already seized this huge amount……”
http://blog.nationmultimedia.com/thanong/2010/02/18/entry-1
“it was reported that”, “It is believed that”, “might”….. Yep, that’s definitely a man who’s sure of his facts, isn’t it?
For light relief from all this, I’d say NotTheNation get it about right:
“We could lose up to 75% of our content if it’s no longer feasible to just say that the Economist, Wall Street Journal, Amnesty International, The World Court, the CIA, and the British Parliament are all on Thaksin’s payroll,” said Thanong Khantong, editor of the Nation. “I might actually have to start looking up facts. It would ruin me.”
http://www.notthenation.com/pages/news/getnews.php?id=870
Finally, on a scale of 1-10 for credibility, where does one put a Thanong pronouncement – above or below a StanG report of a “rumor running around Chatuchak”?
Thailand’s disparity between agriculture and industry
Looking again I notice graph 1 shows GDP/worker figures in both categories rising to 1997 – the year of the crash and then eventually rising again as the economy recovers.
The percentage growth in the agricultural sector is much greater than the industrial sector to apparently 5 times what it was 20 years ago.
Does this mean anything? Let’s go back 200 years and a bit more before the industrial revolution. A visiting US lecturer at Payap University showed GDP figures from C18th where Germany and China had roughly the same per capita GDP. GDP’s which, in a fashion fed, housed and clothed the people of the countries concerned.
I would say that by and large Thais today and 20 years ago are better fed, housed and clothed than the Germans and Chinese of old. They own their own houses in the countryside and mostly have a TV, mobile phone & motor bike at least. What is more their children are not deprived of holiday amusement because the Red Shirts are blocking access to the malls, unlike the wretched children of Bangkok.
So I suggest this discussion about GDP per worker is about the extent to which we are part of the World economy of over production, waste and environmental destruction.
Being kept down on the farm means there is somebody to look after the land, if and when people decide that is desirable and that when the economies of the World tumble because the price of oil soars or we decide not to destroy all by burning fossil fuels, Thailand may be more resilient than most.
Remember the song “U ban nok … mai dong ha ngan…” ?
Thongchai Winichakul on the Red “germs”
jonfernquest -The idea that the killings were some kind of thought-virus that Thaksin spread in Thais is ludicrous. The policy was enthusiastically supported with little internal opposition, and the only reason it stopped was because foreign governments were expressing concern and the country was getting a black eye. The war on drugs is one of the few areas in which the yellows and reds were in agreement. By the way, Buddhism has about as much affect on Thai attitudes towards violence as Christianity does on so-called Christians–in other words very little. Thailand has long had a very high murder and violent crime rate, long preceding Thaksin’s ascent to power.
Thongchai Winichakul on the Red “germs”
Forgive me for adding a few more words of emphasis.
I think the ‘nak-leng’ analogy, while very illuminating, also has important limits. It’s illuminating, I believe, on political culture – the way the leaders talk to enemy, women, gays etc. and certain of their behaviors, action – reactions, which Thongchai describes vividly. But these people, the ‘core leaders’, not to mention Thaksin and his circles (civilian and police/military), are also politicians and (new) elite, people who have interests and power to protect and to grasp. They are also the kind of people who, in power, show quite little regards for the ‘cost’ of achieving something in terms of human lives (think of ‘war on drugs’ or ‘the South’). It would be, as I already said, quite a miracle if these people’s thinking suddenly change. And that’s the gist of my criticism of the Reds leadership tactical thinking.
One particular reason why I like Thongchai’s nak-leng passages is, a few weeks ago, a friend of ours, the famous literary critic, Chusak Phattharakunwanit, wrote a letter to me, in which he described in vivid ‘montage’ of everyday-life examples, the kind of culture among the Red Shirts mass, of which we, former left-wing activists are not familiar. The kind of culture that, under some circumstances, could turn to rightist as well as ‘leftist’ direction. I urged Chusak to expand it into an article. His and the part of Thongchai’s article on the nak-leng culture would compliment each other nicely.
“The deep political crisis within the Royal Thai Army officer corps”
We do not know how accurately the writer is reporting, or the extent to which his informants were telling the truth, or whether indeed the writer is actually one of the hospitalized officers pursuing his own agenda. But in any case, the article gives credence–and detail–to the suspicion that part of what is happening involves factional disputes within the military. We may suppose that, in addition to retirement and promotion issues, the crisis also involves behind-the-scenes disputes over larger issues such as control of the drug, prostitution, gambling etc. industries, involving multiple branches of the military, the police and other traditional power brokers. All this is interleaved with conflicts among the military, the bureaucracy, which runs the country day-to-day and the government trying to be more than the window-dressing of modern democracy for a mafiaesque state.
Another layer of power relations that I am more familiar with, and which gets scant mention in either the Thai or English press has to do with the non-bank money lenders and large landholders. In Isan where I spend a great deal of time, the farmers are deeply in debt to non-bank lenders who hold title deeds to their land for security. I’ve been in my village when the mayor announced over the village PA system that a lender was available to make loans with which to make payments on Thaksin’s “micro-credit” loans–and as long as you’re borrowing you might as well borrow a bit more (and put a bit more land in hock). That, of course, is related to the large landholders who gobble up the foreclosed farmland when payments finally cannot be made. All that, in turn, is deeply involved with the local patronage hierarchies and, in turn, local government and bureaucracy. The current government is moving to clamp down on loan sharking–delaying payment deadlines on Thaksin-era government loans and moving “non-system loans” to legitimate bank loans with reasonable interest rates. It is also moving to tax excessively large land holdings. It is thus in the interests of the local power brokers to force the government to resign before it can cut into their cash flow. It would thus be in the interest of the farmers to support the current government. But: most of the farmers I know believe, quite seriously and with a kind of animistic faith, that when Thaksin comes back, he will pay off all loans out of his own pocket and bring prosperity to all.
It’s all terribly complex and because there has never been public discourse on and among the power blocks and factions there is no overall picture and no arena for negotiation. No tradition of accommodation and compromise–thus a military coup every ten or so years. What is different now, is that the population at large has gotten involved in the conflicts–yellow shirts, red shirts, multi-colored shirts–and even if they are being used as pawns in struggles among the power-elites, they are bringing their own needs, however poorly articulated, to the battle. I suspect they will not for long defer to whatever resolution the old power blocks make among themselves, but will continue to assert themselves. In short, the crisis is long term. My hope is that arenas will emerge for discourse, deliberation. For verbal combat. For the emergence of a democratic society.
Stephen A. Evans; Note: I speak and read Thai fluently and have some facility in the Isan-Lao language.
Student leaders summoned
Acharn Somsak, were you one of the lecturers who went to give moral support to the students?
Chulalongkorn Hospital – an alternative account
JohnH:
Glad someone found that Solzhenitsyn quote useful. Some more qualified Thai scholar than I should perhaps develop the related ‘Tito’ theme – given that you-know-who gave Tito some literary attention some years back. The obvious point being that the longer a Tito figure keeps the lid on the pot of discord, the bigger the eventual mess when said figure departs.
As for K. Visarut, sooner or later the lid has to come off the pot. The longer this takes, the more the cooking is going to smell like something Fu-Fu did under the sofa and the worse things will be.
I wouldn’t assume that everybody here wants to fire the entire kitchen staff. Most of us here are rather more nuanced than that and don’t necessarily believe in throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Do I win an award for mixed metaphors?
Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia
Greg,
These clips have poor sound quality. If you know any SABM members please let them know. Thanks once again for your enthusiastic reporting. What has been going on in Malaysia gave me a few things to think about. We can always learn from other people’s experience if we think hard and observe with foresight. I’m not a Muslim, and nor do I come from the south of Thailand; but I have found Malaysia- Mahatirism particularly- to be a source of policy thinking for the Thai South.
Thongchai Winichakul on the Red “germs”
“A very important note of fact: perhaps the most distinguished patient at the Chula Hospital at the moment is the Supreme Patriarch, who has been there for the past few years. He refused to be moved….”
Just by this paragraph, we should know that the author either does not really know or pretend to not know so as to advance his biased interpretation. It is well known for several years that the Supreme Patriarch suffers Alzheimer Disease at the advanced stage. How could you see that he refused to be moved when he does not know where he is now?
If you care to make a reserch a little, during Thaksin time, the govt had to appoint an acting Supreme Patriarch but was opposed by some monks especially Luang Ta Maha Bua and his followers. Chulalongkorn doctors had to give an honest opinion that the Supreme Patriarch could not function before Luang Ta and his followers backed down.
It was politics as usual even among the high ranking monks, trying to grab and hold on to worldly power.
So be careful if you read his opinion. If a well-known fact is twisted, what else?
Interview with Thaksin: “I am speaking to you from heaven”
StanG – The same Thanong, the man who said that Thaksin was seriously ill one day and then the next day Thaksin was found in Montenegro sipping tea?…… some credible guy we have here.