Emulating Bhumibol?
The Thai people are a far cry from much emulation regarding the king’s merits, and in fact, the opposite can be better argued. The king constantly argues against the very values that Thai society often seems to cherish – greed, selfishness, intolerance, double standards, etc.
There are many groups of people within the red-shirts just as there are many groups within the yellow-shirts. So I’m sick and tired of all the farangs here who’d tried to label the reds as anti-royalist or pro-democracy. The same goes to those who’d tried to label the yellows as conservative urban elite royalists. It is my contention that the only thing they have in common among the yellows is their hatred of Thaksin.
I’m sure that among the reds leadership there has always been strong sentiment against the royals. But for most of the rural Isarn people, especially the uneducated which there are plenty among the reds, they’d speak out their love of the king openly and would never have said anything that’s not supportive of the monarchy. They do this not out of fear of the LM law but because they do have genuine love and respect for the king and the monarchy. This should not come as a surprise and is rather a result of the life-long propaganda by the palace and the Thai government.
Thaksin and the reds leadership have so far avoided attacking the king or even went out of their way to say that they are loyal to the monarchy for fear of losing support of the rural people.
Isn’t the problem that it doesn’t really matter to certain groups of wealthy individuals whether or not the Thai economy limps along? Surely family-run businesses primarily serving a domestic market don’t really care about exports, tourism and all that.
I think Not The Nation has it spot on:
SET Pretends To Be Connected To Economy, Falls
BANGKOK – The Stock Exchange of Thailand, in a move designed to give the impression that its performance is related to the real economy of Thailand, fell 9.87 points, or 1.34 percent yesterday in heavy trading.
The bourse, consisting largely of obscurely-named companies with shadowy ownership and management details whose shares are traded in massive blocks by informed insiders in naked pump-and-dump manipulations, has failed to attract outside investors who remain dubious of its unregulated, casino-like qualities.
“This is a good move by the puppet masters of the SET, to deliberately go down in sync with actual Thai economic indicators,” said Jumpol Pakul, a senior trader at Bualuang Securities. “It may give them credibility they would otherwise never have.”
“The other option being actual SEC regulation and transparency,” he said. “But we know that’s out of the question.”
The shadow allows for all forms of ‘political theory’, (ergh, I shouldn’t have said theory) as I wrote without elaborating on, to secure legitimacy because it doesn’t matter what political theory is used as long as the monarchy’s shadow is secure. I think a socialist Thailand would not be out of the question if the monarchy maintained legitimacy. “As long as my people are happy…” And yes, mentioning anarchy was hyperbole and a bit ridiculous. But to legitimate myself, anarchy has been seen on the streets where public order has been absent recently.. Can we say that democracy matters to Vajiralongkorn? The military matters because it will directly secure Vajiralongkorn’s legitimacy. To those who will see what I’ve said as an overstatement, ask yourselves: does Thailand’s “constitution” come before Vajiralongkorn in the order of things? For Vajiralongkorn to be of positive value to Thai democracy, he must place himself below the constitution and acknowledge his political role.
“plagued by corruption”? not worthy of an academic statement. “plagued by alleged corruption” maybe. Even Doner falls into the trap set by the state’s propaganda machine re-Thaksin being “corrupt” (?) From a personal contact in the Prosecutor’s office (established early 2007, & constituted by fervent anti-Thaksin cronies) there has not been a shred of hard evidence against the man after four years of consistent attempt to weave fiction other than consistent heresy, allegations, innuendo, and of course a family misdemeanour over relatively insignificant wealth transfers which all rich folk in Thailand do… It’s the old story if: if we keep saying something over and over again- (as Sondhi Lim & his pals did): it must be true! It deflects from us looking too deeply into present mismanagement, human rights abuses and corruption against the fascist DP-Amaart-Military Alliance. This actually pales in comparison to anything in TRT’s time. Wake up folks; don’t be duped any longer…Someone is innocent unless shown by an unbiased court of law to be otherwise.
This is like listening to children arguing in a playground.
The issue is not whether Eric Campbell should or should not have put that clip into the segment, but whether or not it should have been broadcast. That would have been a decision for the programme editor. In fact, given the nature of the programme (which I’ll admit I haven’t seen, although I have seen ‘that clip’), I would imagine that the decision to broadcast the footage would have been cleared a lot higher than that.
If you feel strongly about it all, stop whingeing on this thread and write to ABC instead – ask how broadcasting a segment that included that clip fits in with the basic Editorial Policies and Code of Practice.
Let me help you all along a bit –
“The Editorial Policies are freely available to all staff and understanding of it is essential for all who have editorial responsibility for ABC content. A copy of the Editorial Policies and the ABC’s Code of Practice can be downloaded from this page.
These policies enable program makers and the public to understand the editorial and ethical principles that are fundamental to the ABC. They are developed with the experience of ABC program makers and take account of the requirements of current legislation and regulation. Most importantly, they seek to reflect the standards that ABC audiences expect of their national broadcaster.
These policies offer a frame of reference as well as, on occasions, a check list of considerations aimed at helping program makers make difficult judgements for themselves.
The policies encourage program makers to satisfy the expectations of their audiences. But they also allow room for the challenging and disturbing to be seen or heard from time to time. To that end the policies insist, directly and by implication, on four fundamentals: honesty, fairness, independence and respect.”
And spare us all the Princess Diana analogies. She was hounded by press and paps alike – an unenviable position for anyone – but she also chose, often enough, to put herself in places where the hounding was inevitable.
saffir –
Yes, the foot clapper was a response to the hand clapper. I may have the chronology wrong, but I believe it also came after some incidents when PAD supporters threw shoes at Samak. It certainly came after PAD supporters used their hand clappers to harass their enemies at public appearances, including funerals.
So to my mind, at least, the appearance of the foot clapper was a rather good-humored escalation of the Yellow-Red battle, a way of underlining the hypocrisy of sanctimonious Yellow Shirts. That point, I think, was reinforced by a brief burst of tut-tutting over the foot clappers by various academic types (who didn’t seem to have anything to say about the shoes that were thrown at Samak, or any other breaches of decorum by the Yellow Shirts.)
Prof Doner has not mentioned that the sectoral uneven development has found equally dire consequences at the spatial level. Under the rationale of economic efficiency, during the economic boom in the late 80s and early 90s, the NESDB (under the dynamic leadership of Dr. Phisit Pakkasem) pioneered the idea of “managing growth” (along with ADB and WB ideas on good governance and neo-liberal approaches – BOT, private sector participation, ineffective zonal incentive policies of the BOI, etc) – instead of controlling growth. The result of that policy favoring a Bangkok centered development has resulted in this gargantuan mega-city called the Extended Bangkok Metropolitan Region (EBMR) that was projected by the TDRI/UNDP study of 1991 to contain nearly 25% of Thailand’s population by 2010 (this year) and contributes at least 60% of the wealth of Thailand. There was little attempt to counter the massive urban bias of development with agricultural development in the rural areas (very little R&D) and infrastructure supports (irrigation, marketing facilities, agricultural extension) to improve productivities and move up to higher value added goods. Forget the south of Thailand. Or the Northeast. No wonder a few months ago there was a study mentioned in NM that a high percentage of incomes of agricultural households were derived outside agriculture (e.g., remittances through temporary migration). Taksin’s populist policy of flooding the rural areas with money for OTOP was ill conceived since the OTOP potentiality was not adequately understood, and the scale was too small (villages) to realize economies of scale. OTOP had very little substance (a good example of unsound public policy), but was indeed a grand bread and circuses approach for the poor masses to get their share of the economic pie through handouts.
About the Thai labor movement. Prof Doner is right in saying that we are now reaping the consequences of this lack of an institutional safety valve to strenghten worker’s rights, influence employment practices and improve overall skills and productivity. Union membership was reported in 2003 by the Nation to have been stalled at 3 percent. Now it is probably even less. As strong labor movement could also have had a strong influence in education policy to raise the standards of the workforce. But there was none, clearly symptomatic of the low wage, low skilled segment that Thailand insists in competing or have difficulty in getting out.
Be that as it may, and I want to thank Prof Doner for his contributions (especially reminding us of the inability of Thailand to go beyond Kunio’s “ersatz” capitalism), I think there will be some kind of extra-territorial (hidden of course) manipulation of events (maybe Japan subcontracting the black ops to the US?) to make sure Thailand does not plunge into a downward spiral of a “failed” state. Thailand had been lionized for being a successful Tiger by the supra international financial institutions like the IMF and WB for following the tenets of the Washington Consensus. The downward slide of Thailand would be a major slap in the face(s) of these institutions and bring further mistrust and doubt on the neo-liberal model of growth.
“The problems with cultivating this intense cult of personality, however, is that it’s unlikely to survive the person.” (lek #18)
precisely!!! thongchai winichakul recently made the exact same argument through a brilliant historical analogy concerning the transition from chulalongkorn to vajiravudh… (maybe NM can post the link here 🙂
in other words, it is surely correct that the great majority of thais highly respect and admire bhumibol adulyadej, surely because “he’s bothered to do some things that positively impacted upon the lives of certain communities in Thailand” – as petr (#15) rightly says – BUT ALSO because of the constant “flow of propaganda” AND “because people know they can go to jail for professing anything but eternal love. – as lek (#18) rightly says – however, this love and admiration does not necessarily extend
a) to other members of the royal family… just compare how many households have a picture of the queen, let alone of “sia-o” up on their wall – indeed, i have heard of red-leaning thais cutting out (!!!) the queen on household pictures depicting the royal couple…
or
b) to the institution of the monarchy as such… i have talked to several thai friends (as said, safely out of earshot of others) who greatly and genuinely admire king bhumibol, but have serious doubts about whether the monarchy can (or should!!!) continue after his death…
in sum, while most thais respect and love king bhumibol (be it out of respect, indoctrination, fear or – most likely – a combination of all three), many are also increasingly critical of the monarchy as an institution, especially in light of what has happened since september 2006, and in terms of what will happen following bhumibol’s death…
Vajiralongkorn will be good for Thai democracy, anarchy, fascism and socialism. His apparent weakness will increase dependency on leadership spawned from society. However, his ‘goodness’ for Thais as an example will be limited insofar as his own apparent limited respect for democratic process itself. Limited because there doesn’t appear to be much evidence of his respect for democracy, rather, more evidence adds weight to speculation of his respect for the military. Thus far, he has shown no inclination to step up and make a stand for anything Thais are concerned about.
There needs to be a strong example in Thailand for people to mimic to compensate for the absence of Bhumibol. While his father is ailing, this would be an opportune time for Vajiralongkorn to lead. So far, he has only shown us his wife, his good friend Fu Fu and his respect for royal obligation.
Thailand’s sons and daughters have nobody of moral standing to look to with the absence of Bhumibol. I remember a young boy of 5 or 6 years of age living with his mother on the corner of Soi Chaiyapruk. I remember very clearly one time while walking back to my hovel watching him for a moment huffing away from a glue bag that had been previously used presumably by the Scooter gang member who’d passed out on the seat sitting adjacent to the corner 7/11. There are no examples. Not for the scooter gang member, not for the boy, not for millions of Thais. Leadership in Thailand remains in the hands of dubious elites and vacuous bureaucrats. These are Thailand’s “examples.”
People will refer to Buddhism as the moral and ethical framework for Thailand. People will say ‘so what?’ about corruption as it’s used politically by all sides of the present fiasco. But, as the elderly gentile who quoted you in his comment on your presentation said: Thailand has one of the highest homicide rates in the world. And sure, corruption may not significantly inhibit overall economic development, or development of the ‘rural poor’. However, the actions of a nation’s people are surely a better indication of the prosperity of a nation. In this sense, Thailand has not moved at all socially probably since before June 1932.
With the absence of Bhumibol, we can see Thailand is left open to the entire spectrum of political philosophy with political leaders adopting fascism, socialism, democracy and even anarchy because of the absence of an example to follow. Vajiralongkorn will be good for all of them, not just democracy because he hasn’t made it clear where he stands.
The hollowness of Bhumibol’s increasingly used promotional material continues to exacerbate the rotten gums of Thailand’s institutional setup. Those elites (on all sides) in the throws of the current situation have no answer to his social influence and example. Vajiralongkorn could be the answer, but instead he remains lost in his father’s well-promoted shadow. This shadow is ‘above politics’ and allows for all forms of political theory.
For Vajiralongkorn to be good for Thai democracy and not fascism, socialism or anarchy, he needs to make his political sense known publicly. He needs to guide people used to one obsolete example of social order, towards another. This is his time. If he doesn’t use whatever sort of social capital he has for this purpose he will lose it, and the consequences for Thailand will be grave indeed.
“I just want to talk about a good father. Now, coming from me, if you where to personally look at my life, you would ask the question, “What do you know about a good father?” And that would be a fair question, because one of the statements I have written on my notes here today is that men need examples.That’s not holy men, all of us are helped by examples. But it does seem that as men we feel better when other men show us that they are man enough to do whatever it is that we have hesitancy in doing. Whether it is cook, sew, maybe sit or to shout, clap our hands, cry…”… “We ask, sociologically, why are there so many messed up families, what’s the problem? Well in most of those cases, those children have no or little example to follow. There are exceptions but in most of those cases they have little or no example to follow. A good father is more than one who provides shelter, food and body coverage…” – Paul Robeson (I think)
Ten years ago, I attended a blessing ceremony for two recently purchased motorcycles in an open air village wat in Kalasin, Thailand .
The motorcycles were not allowed into this space, so different strings were attached to ‘tie’ the motorcycles outside to the monks.
It was explained that the strings were used to channel the spiritual power of the monks into these inanimate objects and also to create a barrier against misfortune or bad luck.
In Thailand, and certainly in Bangkok, Buddhist string ceremonies are also commonplace to establish protective barriers against all things ‘bad’ around houses and even apartment buidlings.
To use the Socratic question again:
should Australians living in Australia be allowed to watch material that would be subject to lèse majesté laws in Thailand?
should Australians living in Australia be allowed to watch material that would be subject to laws in Burma/Iran/N.Korea/Zimbabwe/Australia
Does the answer change?
The issue IS the Orwellian, usage, interpretation and application of the law.
Since (treading- oh- so- carefully now) certain highly respected institutions have also repeatedly questioned it. (I think for the same reasons)
It is now obviously a blunt political instrument masquerading as a device for promoting social harmony. It is used ad-hoc by rival politicians and like Dr Johnsons epigram on patrotism-“the last refuge of a scoundrel” (Think Sondhi, Thaksin, Ahmed Akbar and any number of others).
In my opinion it is an unjust, unfair, socially and morally repellent instrument. It’s application corrodes the institution it is alleged to protect. Interestingly someone like the current PM would probably agree with all the above but still call it a necessity!
We have to ask both why? and what is “National Security”?
Sadly I think it’s use will become even more prevalent in the uncertain future before the nation when the current government is fondly remembered for it’s charm and moderation. A nation thus cowed into subservience like this is open to oppression by any future enclave of power.
Perhaps this is why it is so eagerly contested?
Winner take all?
In the West they sue for millions for unauthorized release of any private material even on the Internet.
In case of paparazzi footage they can at least claim the ownership of the tape and the right to show what they saw themselves.
In this case no one can claim rights to any part of this video.
Just last week I read in Database that you must seek permission of the subject even for pictures uploaded on photo enthusiast sites.
Even in Thailand last year a woman sued her former boyfriend for uploading their private videos on the Internet without her permission and won.
For Chinese – try to find any of that Hong Kong actor Eddie sexcapades anywhere online, let alone on Australian government TV. I’m sure they mentioned the scandal when it first broke out.
[…] internationally. He has had to consolidate power to protect himself from UMNO domestically (read here) while he has focused on the international dimension as this is the only area within which the […]
John H 80
“the ineptitude of the police and army”
I hope they never become “ept”, united and organised.
Then there would be a second “Myanmar” or North Korea.
Whats the reason you did not record the Q&A? would love to hear that.
[It was a judgement call made by the organisers, Tyrell Haberkorn and myself. We wanted to encourage as free and frank audience participation as possible and our feeling was that this would best be served by not recording the questions. When I get some time I will write up a brief summary of the discussion. Andrew Walker.]
Juan Carlos – About the modernization of Japanese royalty. I would say that the Thai royalty followed it pretty well, in the sense of 1940s period though. If you read how Hirohito played the role in Japan joining the WWII on the Axis side, you should notice that Hirohito was pretty the man behind the scene who dictated Tojo, who would eventually paid for the mistake with his life and saved Hirohito. Hirohito never explicitly said what he wants, he usually convey his message either trough Tojo or the Foreign ministers (several of them) with a hint of a nod. In a record by Tojo’s assistance, when Tojo and his chief of staff went to see Hirohito about operation Tora Tora Tora (bombing of Pearl Harbor) and the declaration of war, Hirohito didn’t say a word and simply give a nod. That reaction later on was use to separate Hirohito out of party who involved with the war. Hirohito later didnt go to the war trail and wasn’t serve any punishment (Tojo was executed). I guess this is what is actually going on now in Thailand, but its just my guess.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t the Bunnags the largest slave-owning clan? By freeing the slaves, R5 majorly depleted Bunnag Mojo?
Regardless, it was inevitable that the slaves would be freed for reasons of state. At that period in Thai history there was a race to conform with certain Western expectations in order to reduce pretexts for colonisation. As it was, Thailand became for a time somewhat of a de facto British protectorate – albeit without any obvious Lord Cromer figure. Did the job and kept the French from biting off even larger chunks of territory.
R5 couldn’t *not* free the phrai. Not that they ended up a whole lot freer, anyway.
Meiji Japan fascinates me. Everyone should read Fukuzawa’s biography to get an inkling of the journey one person took from impoverished rural samurai to the founding of Keio University. I wonder just how much effort the Thai royals put into studying Japanese modernisation at that time? One always reads about this person and that person going to study in Europe. Perhaps some of the academics here might know much more about this?
The Thai village noted by some posters is an imagined construct.
For those who have spent even a little time in a Thai village, were you not struck by the layout; orderly straight lines of fenced off houses and intersecting soi’s, very similar to the urban grid systems used in the west.
An act of spontaneous village design and construction carried out by villagers, or a government sponsored act of confinement and control?
To complete this picture of peaceful coexistence and rural harmony, just add in the obligatory royal photographs in every home.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Why King Vajiralongkorn will be good for Thai Democracy
Emulating Bhumibol?
The Thai people are a far cry from much emulation regarding the king’s merits, and in fact, the opposite can be better argued. The king constantly argues against the very values that Thai society often seems to cherish – greed, selfishness, intolerance, double standards, etc.
Royal reds, reds, and rebel reds
There are many groups of people within the red-shirts just as there are many groups within the yellow-shirts. So I’m sick and tired of all the farangs here who’d tried to label the reds as anti-royalist or pro-democracy. The same goes to those who’d tried to label the yellows as conservative urban elite royalists. It is my contention that the only thing they have in common among the yellows is their hatred of Thaksin.
I’m sure that among the reds leadership there has always been strong sentiment against the royals. But for most of the rural Isarn people, especially the uneducated which there are plenty among the reds, they’d speak out their love of the king openly and would never have said anything that’s not supportive of the monarchy. They do this not out of fear of the LM law but because they do have genuine love and respect for the king and the monarchy. This should not come as a surprise and is rather a result of the life-long propaganda by the palace and the Thai government.
Thaksin and the reds leadership have so far avoided attacking the king or even went out of their way to say that they are loyal to the monarchy for fear of losing support of the rural people.
Economic strategy and the roots of Thai political turmoil
Isn’t the problem that it doesn’t really matter to certain groups of wealthy individuals whether or not the Thai economy limps along? Surely family-run businesses primarily serving a domestic market don’t really care about exports, tourism and all that.
I think Not The Nation has it spot on:
SET Pretends To Be Connected To Economy, Falls
BANGKOK – The Stock Exchange of Thailand, in a move designed to give the impression that its performance is related to the real economy of Thailand, fell 9.87 points, or 1.34 percent yesterday in heavy trading.
The bourse, consisting largely of obscurely-named companies with shadowy ownership and management details whose shares are traded in massive blocks by informed insiders in naked pump-and-dump manipulations, has failed to attract outside investors who remain dubious of its unregulated, casino-like qualities.
“This is a good move by the puppet masters of the SET, to deliberately go down in sync with actual Thai economic indicators,” said Jumpol Pakul, a senior trader at Bualuang Securities. “It may give them credibility they would otherwise never have.”
“The other option being actual SEC regulation and transparency,” he said. “But we know that’s out of the question.”
My favourite NTN article of all is however:
Rich Hi-So Girl Overcomes Advantages To Open Unprofitable Business
http://www.notthenation.com/pages/news/getnews.php?id=379
Read it and weep.
Why King Vajiralongkorn will be good for Thai Democracy
The shadow allows for all forms of ‘political theory’, (ergh, I shouldn’t have said theory) as I wrote without elaborating on, to secure legitimacy because it doesn’t matter what political theory is used as long as the monarchy’s shadow is secure. I think a socialist Thailand would not be out of the question if the monarchy maintained legitimacy. “As long as my people are happy…” And yes, mentioning anarchy was hyperbole and a bit ridiculous. But to legitimate myself, anarchy has been seen on the streets where public order has been absent recently.. Can we say that democracy matters to Vajiralongkorn? The military matters because it will directly secure Vajiralongkorn’s legitimacy. To those who will see what I’ve said as an overstatement, ask yourselves: does Thailand’s “constitution” come before Vajiralongkorn in the order of things? For Vajiralongkorn to be of positive value to Thai democracy, he must place himself below the constitution and acknowledge his political role.
Economic strategy and the roots of Thai political turmoil
“plagued by corruption”? not worthy of an academic statement. “plagued by alleged corruption” maybe. Even Doner falls into the trap set by the state’s propaganda machine re-Thaksin being “corrupt” (?) From a personal contact in the Prosecutor’s office (established early 2007, & constituted by fervent anti-Thaksin cronies) there has not been a shred of hard evidence against the man after four years of consistent attempt to weave fiction other than consistent heresy, allegations, innuendo, and of course a family misdemeanour over relatively insignificant wealth transfers which all rich folk in Thailand do… It’s the old story if: if we keep saying something over and over again- (as Sondhi Lim & his pals did): it must be true! It deflects from us looking too deeply into present mismanagement, human rights abuses and corruption against the fascist DP-Amaart-Military Alliance. This actually pales in comparison to anything in TRT’s time. Wake up folks; don’t be duped any longer…Someone is innocent unless shown by an unbiased court of law to be otherwise.
Eric Campbell on journalistic duty
This is like listening to children arguing in a playground.
The issue is not whether Eric Campbell should or should not have put that clip into the segment, but whether or not it should have been broadcast. That would have been a decision for the programme editor. In fact, given the nature of the programme (which I’ll admit I haven’t seen, although I have seen ‘that clip’), I would imagine that the decision to broadcast the footage would have been cleared a lot higher than that.
If you feel strongly about it all, stop whingeing on this thread and write to ABC instead – ask how broadcasting a segment that included that clip fits in with the basic Editorial Policies and Code of Practice.
Let me help you all along a bit –
“The Editorial Policies are freely available to all staff and understanding of it is essential for all who have editorial responsibility for ABC content. A copy of the Editorial Policies and the ABC’s Code of Practice can be downloaded from this page.
These policies enable program makers and the public to understand the editorial and ethical principles that are fundamental to the ABC. They are developed with the experience of ABC program makers and take account of the requirements of current legislation and regulation. Most importantly, they seek to reflect the standards that ABC audiences expect of their national broadcaster.
These policies offer a frame of reference as well as, on occasions, a check list of considerations aimed at helping program makers make difficult judgements for themselves.
The policies encourage program makers to satisfy the expectations of their audiences. But they also allow room for the challenging and disturbing to be seen or heard from time to time. To that end the policies insist, directly and by implication, on four fundamentals: honesty, fairness, independence and respect.”
http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/edpols.htm
And spare us all the Princess Diana analogies. She was hounded by press and paps alike – an unenviable position for anyone – but she also chose, often enough, to put herself in places where the hounding was inevitable.
Video of Thailand on the Verge
saffir –
Yes, the foot clapper was a response to the hand clapper. I may have the chronology wrong, but I believe it also came after some incidents when PAD supporters threw shoes at Samak. It certainly came after PAD supporters used their hand clappers to harass their enemies at public appearances, including funerals.
So to my mind, at least, the appearance of the foot clapper was a rather good-humored escalation of the Yellow-Red battle, a way of underlining the hypocrisy of sanctimonious Yellow Shirts. That point, I think, was reinforced by a brief burst of tut-tutting over the foot clappers by various academic types (who didn’t seem to have anything to say about the shoes that were thrown at Samak, or any other breaches of decorum by the Yellow Shirts.)
Economic strategy and the roots of Thai political turmoil
Prof Doner has not mentioned that the sectoral uneven development has found equally dire consequences at the spatial level. Under the rationale of economic efficiency, during the economic boom in the late 80s and early 90s, the NESDB (under the dynamic leadership of Dr. Phisit Pakkasem) pioneered the idea of “managing growth” (along with ADB and WB ideas on good governance and neo-liberal approaches – BOT, private sector participation, ineffective zonal incentive policies of the BOI, etc) – instead of controlling growth. The result of that policy favoring a Bangkok centered development has resulted in this gargantuan mega-city called the Extended Bangkok Metropolitan Region (EBMR) that was projected by the TDRI/UNDP study of 1991 to contain nearly 25% of Thailand’s population by 2010 (this year) and contributes at least 60% of the wealth of Thailand. There was little attempt to counter the massive urban bias of development with agricultural development in the rural areas (very little R&D) and infrastructure supports (irrigation, marketing facilities, agricultural extension) to improve productivities and move up to higher value added goods. Forget the south of Thailand. Or the Northeast. No wonder a few months ago there was a study mentioned in NM that a high percentage of incomes of agricultural households were derived outside agriculture (e.g., remittances through temporary migration). Taksin’s populist policy of flooding the rural areas with money for OTOP was ill conceived since the OTOP potentiality was not adequately understood, and the scale was too small (villages) to realize economies of scale. OTOP had very little substance (a good example of unsound public policy), but was indeed a grand bread and circuses approach for the poor masses to get their share of the economic pie through handouts.
About the Thai labor movement. Prof Doner is right in saying that we are now reaping the consequences of this lack of an institutional safety valve to strenghten worker’s rights, influence employment practices and improve overall skills and productivity. Union membership was reported in 2003 by the Nation to have been stalled at 3 percent. Now it is probably even less. As strong labor movement could also have had a strong influence in education policy to raise the standards of the workforce. But there was none, clearly symptomatic of the low wage, low skilled segment that Thailand insists in competing or have difficulty in getting out.
Be that as it may, and I want to thank Prof Doner for his contributions (especially reminding us of the inability of Thailand to go beyond Kunio’s “ersatz” capitalism), I think there will be some kind of extra-territorial (hidden of course) manipulation of events (maybe Japan subcontracting the black ops to the US?) to make sure Thailand does not plunge into a downward spiral of a “failed” state. Thailand had been lionized for being a successful Tiger by the supra international financial institutions like the IMF and WB for following the tenets of the Washington Consensus. The downward slide of Thailand would be a major slap in the face(s) of these institutions and bring further mistrust and doubt on the neo-liberal model of growth.
Royal reds, reds, and rebel reds
“The problems with cultivating this intense cult of personality, however, is that it’s unlikely to survive the person.” (lek #18)
precisely!!! thongchai winichakul recently made the exact same argument through a brilliant historical analogy concerning the transition from chulalongkorn to vajiravudh… (maybe NM can post the link here 🙂
in other words, it is surely correct that the great majority of thais highly respect and admire bhumibol adulyadej, surely because “he’s bothered to do some things that positively impacted upon the lives of certain communities in Thailand” – as petr (#15) rightly says – BUT ALSO because of the constant “flow of propaganda” AND “because people know they can go to jail for professing anything but eternal love. – as lek (#18) rightly says – however, this love and admiration does not necessarily extend
a) to other members of the royal family… just compare how many households have a picture of the queen, let alone of “sia-o” up on their wall – indeed, i have heard of red-leaning thais cutting out (!!!) the queen on household pictures depicting the royal couple…
or
b) to the institution of the monarchy as such… i have talked to several thai friends (as said, safely out of earshot of others) who greatly and genuinely admire king bhumibol, but have serious doubts about whether the monarchy can (or should!!!) continue after his death…
in sum, while most thais respect and love king bhumibol (be it out of respect, indoctrination, fear or – most likely – a combination of all three), many are also increasingly critical of the monarchy as an institution, especially in light of what has happened since september 2006, and in terms of what will happen following bhumibol’s death…
Why King Vajiralongkorn will be good for Thai Democracy
Vajiralongkorn will be good for Thai democracy, anarchy, fascism and socialism. His apparent weakness will increase dependency on leadership spawned from society. However, his ‘goodness’ for Thais as an example will be limited insofar as his own apparent limited respect for democratic process itself. Limited because there doesn’t appear to be much evidence of his respect for democracy, rather, more evidence adds weight to speculation of his respect for the military. Thus far, he has shown no inclination to step up and make a stand for anything Thais are concerned about.
There needs to be a strong example in Thailand for people to mimic to compensate for the absence of Bhumibol. While his father is ailing, this would be an opportune time for Vajiralongkorn to lead. So far, he has only shown us his wife, his good friend Fu Fu and his respect for royal obligation.
Thailand’s sons and daughters have nobody of moral standing to look to with the absence of Bhumibol. I remember a young boy of 5 or 6 years of age living with his mother on the corner of Soi Chaiyapruk. I remember very clearly one time while walking back to my hovel watching him for a moment huffing away from a glue bag that had been previously used presumably by the Scooter gang member who’d passed out on the seat sitting adjacent to the corner 7/11. There are no examples. Not for the scooter gang member, not for the boy, not for millions of Thais. Leadership in Thailand remains in the hands of dubious elites and vacuous bureaucrats. These are Thailand’s “examples.”
People will refer to Buddhism as the moral and ethical framework for Thailand. People will say ‘so what?’ about corruption as it’s used politically by all sides of the present fiasco. But, as the elderly gentile who quoted you in his comment on your presentation said: Thailand has one of the highest homicide rates in the world. And sure, corruption may not significantly inhibit overall economic development, or development of the ‘rural poor’. However, the actions of a nation’s people are surely a better indication of the prosperity of a nation. In this sense, Thailand has not moved at all socially probably since before June 1932.
With the absence of Bhumibol, we can see Thailand is left open to the entire spectrum of political philosophy with political leaders adopting fascism, socialism, democracy and even anarchy because of the absence of an example to follow. Vajiralongkorn will be good for all of them, not just democracy because he hasn’t made it clear where he stands.
The hollowness of Bhumibol’s increasingly used promotional material continues to exacerbate the rotten gums of Thailand’s institutional setup. Those elites (on all sides) in the throws of the current situation have no answer to his social influence and example. Vajiralongkorn could be the answer, but instead he remains lost in his father’s well-promoted shadow. This shadow is ‘above politics’ and allows for all forms of political theory.
For Vajiralongkorn to be good for Thai democracy and not fascism, socialism or anarchy, he needs to make his political sense known publicly. He needs to guide people used to one obsolete example of social order, towards another. This is his time. If he doesn’t use whatever sort of social capital he has for this purpose he will lose it, and the consequences for Thailand will be grave indeed.
“I just want to talk about a good father. Now, coming from me, if you where to personally look at my life, you would ask the question, “What do you know about a good father?” And that would be a fair question, because one of the statements I have written on my notes here today is that men need examples.That’s not holy men, all of us are helped by examples. But it does seem that as men we feel better when other men show us that they are man enough to do whatever it is that we have hesitancy in doing. Whether it is cook, sew, maybe sit or to shout, clap our hands, cry…”… “We ask, sociologically, why are there so many messed up families, what’s the problem? Well in most of those cases, those children have no or little example to follow. There are exceptions but in most of those cases they have little or no example to follow. A good father is more than one who provides shelter, food and body coverage…” – Paul Robeson (I think)
Response on “string theory”
Ten years ago, I attended a blessing ceremony for two recently purchased motorcycles in an open air village wat in Kalasin, Thailand .
The motorcycles were not allowed into this space, so different strings were attached to ‘tie’ the motorcycles outside to the monks.
It was explained that the strings were used to channel the spiritual power of the monks into these inanimate objects and also to create a barrier against misfortune or bad luck.
In Thailand, and certainly in Bangkok, Buddhist string ceremonies are also commonplace to establish protective barriers against all things ‘bad’ around houses and even apartment buidlings.
ABC TV on Thai politics
Bh. V. // Apr 25, 2010 at 8:32 am
To use the Socratic question again:
should Australians living in Australia be allowed to watch material that would be subject to lèse majesté laws in Thailand?
should Australians living in Australia be allowed to watch material that would be subject to laws in Burma/Iran/N.Korea/Zimbabwe/Australia
Does the answer change?
The issue IS the Orwellian, usage, interpretation and application of the law.
Since (treading- oh- so- carefully now) certain highly respected institutions have also repeatedly questioned it. (I think for the same reasons)
It is now obviously a blunt political instrument masquerading as a device for promoting social harmony. It is used ad-hoc by rival politicians and like Dr Johnsons epigram on patrotism-“the last refuge of a scoundrel” (Think Sondhi, Thaksin, Ahmed Akbar and any number of others).
In my opinion it is an unjust, unfair, socially and morally repellent instrument. It’s application corrodes the institution it is alleged to protect. Interestingly someone like the current PM would probably agree with all the above but still call it a necessity!
We have to ask both why? and what is “National Security”?
Sadly I think it’s use will become even more prevalent in the uncertain future before the nation when the current government is fondly remembered for it’s charm and moderation. A nation thus cowed into subservience like this is open to oppression by any future enclave of power.
Perhaps this is why it is so eagerly contested?
Winner take all?
Eric Campbell on journalistic duty
Denying the obvious now?
In the West they sue for millions for unauthorized release of any private material even on the Internet.
In case of paparazzi footage they can at least claim the ownership of the tape and the right to show what they saw themselves.
In this case no one can claim rights to any part of this video.
Just last week I read in Database that you must seek permission of the subject even for pictures uploaded on photo enthusiast sites.
Even in Thailand last year a woman sued her former boyfriend for uploading their private videos on the Internet without her permission and won.
For Chinese – try to find any of that Hong Kong actor Eddie sexcapades anywhere online, let alone on Australian government TV. I’m sure they mentioned the scandal when it first broke out.
Najib’s defence against UMNO – centralising power
[…] internationally. He has had to consolidate power to protect himself from UMNO domestically (read here) while he has focused on the international dimension as this is the only area within which the […]
ABC TV on Thai politics
John H 80
“the ineptitude of the police and army”
I hope they never become “ept”, united and organised.
Then there would be a second “Myanmar” or North Korea.
Video of Thailand on the Verge
Whats the reason you did not record the Q&A? would love to hear that.
[It was a judgement call made by the organisers, Tyrell Haberkorn and myself. We wanted to encourage as free and frank audience participation as possible and our feeling was that this would best be served by not recording the questions. When I get some time I will write up a brief summary of the discussion. Andrew Walker.]
Royal reds, reds, and rebel reds
Juan Carlos – About the modernization of Japanese royalty. I would say that the Thai royalty followed it pretty well, in the sense of 1940s period though. If you read how Hirohito played the role in Japan joining the WWII on the Axis side, you should notice that Hirohito was pretty the man behind the scene who dictated Tojo, who would eventually paid for the mistake with his life and saved Hirohito. Hirohito never explicitly said what he wants, he usually convey his message either trough Tojo or the Foreign ministers (several of them) with a hint of a nod. In a record by Tojo’s assistance, when Tojo and his chief of staff went to see Hirohito about operation Tora Tora Tora (bombing of Pearl Harbor) and the declaration of war, Hirohito didn’t say a word and simply give a nod. That reaction later on was use to separate Hirohito out of party who involved with the war. Hirohito later didnt go to the war trail and wasn’t serve any punishment (Tojo was executed). I guess this is what is actually going on now in Thailand, but its just my guess.
Royal reds, reds, and rebel reds
Correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t the Bunnags the largest slave-owning clan? By freeing the slaves, R5 majorly depleted Bunnag Mojo?
Regardless, it was inevitable that the slaves would be freed for reasons of state. At that period in Thai history there was a race to conform with certain Western expectations in order to reduce pretexts for colonisation. As it was, Thailand became for a time somewhat of a de facto British protectorate – albeit without any obvious Lord Cromer figure. Did the job and kept the French from biting off even larger chunks of territory.
R5 couldn’t *not* free the phrai. Not that they ended up a whole lot freer, anyway.
Meiji Japan fascinates me. Everyone should read Fukuzawa’s biography to get an inkling of the journey one person took from impoverished rural samurai to the founding of Keio University. I wonder just how much effort the Thai royals put into studying Japanese modernisation at that time? One always reads about this person and that person going to study in Europe. Perhaps some of the academics here might know much more about this?
Royal reds, reds, and rebel reds
The Thai village noted by some posters is an imagined construct.
For those who have spent even a little time in a Thai village, were you not struck by the layout; orderly straight lines of fenced off houses and intersecting soi’s, very similar to the urban grid systems used in the west.
An act of spontaneous village design and construction carried out by villagers, or a government sponsored act of confinement and control?
To complete this picture of peaceful coexistence and rural harmony, just add in the obligatory royal photographs in every home.
More scenes from the stand-off in Bangkok
Oo-er…hmm. Blimey! Looks like you’re right, Nigella #7. That’s what comes from skimming. Silly me! Sorry, people. (Must say I’m relieved.)