…”Is it possible to describe a bit about your racial mix?” …Am an Assamese of Brahmin origin, which is the priestly class all over India. My forefathers about 20 generations ago migrated to Assam from Central India. Assamese are a mix of people- Hindus like the rest of India, Muslim like the one you met & good numbers of people of smaller ethnic groups like the Bodos, Ahoms(the rulers) etc of Tibeto-Burman and Tai origins.
The Assamese word for Burmese is “Maan” & when the Burmese invaded Assam; it was supposedly so brutal that we have a term called “Maanor Din” in our vocabulary(sparingly used though now), which means the Days of the Burmese. If you have similar folk narratives, that would be very interesting to compare.
Well historically many Assamese fled into the surrounding Naga hills and even today some Naga people look very plains Assamese. Legend has it that some even took refuge in the Hukwang valley never to be seen again. Unfortunately very little is known about the positive aspects of Burmese rule in Assam
[…] referendum of 2007 was a farce. This is what I wrote at the time: The referendum is a take-it-or-leave-it offer: if you want elections and a semblance […]
[…] of 2007. Abhisit’s action has highlighted the fact that he owes his prime-ministership to the un-democratic chain of events set in place by the coup of September […]
Maybe Disney Land is going to set up in Thailand. Someone near and dear, however, brought up a question as to whether numero doce was working with the Red Shirts. I doubt his mom would allow that.
Ralph – much as I have disagreed with you in the past – I think
you are correct re. General Kriangsak.
I’ll add this : it is now becoming likely Anupong is being forced to step down, by certain very powerful Palace members – via an overseas trip. And that a coup is under way.
Make no mistake about this Queen Sirikit – if there is a coup now there will be no more Thailand.
Thailand burns – and Isaarn breaks free : under Chinese protection.
BKKLawyer: I would love to see an article specifically on this topic. I *hear* about meritocracy in Thailand, but I’ve certainly never witnessed it. I see Thailand as having an informal caste system that is SO informal that most Thais don’t even perceive or acknowledge it. Of course if you are a foreigner with the “correct” traits you can use these cultural biases to your advantage;-) Outward markers of social class can get you a VERY long way in Bangkok if you are prepared to play that game.
The 16 self-sufficient provinces of Isaarn may soon break-away to form an independent Isaarn state, with more economic ties to China than the Generals’ “Thailand”.
It looks like he managed to sneak in the seminar room together with some UK based Thai Redshirts – much to the dismay of the hosting Thai Embassy staff, ask some inconvenient questions and distribute leaflets.
I just wondered why this is not mentioned in your report or anywhere else..
StanG: You say “Thai working culture is more open to meritocracy than in those days.” A nice thought, seemingly innocuous. But contrary to everything we usually hear about Thai society.
You implicitly acknowledge that the Thai working culture previously was not open to meritocracy. Of course, Thai history is full of examples. When did this change, and what caused it?
I know few Thais who respect merit over the traditional “values” of wealth, seniority, the “right” ethnicity, etc. I hear of few such Thais in the news, even Thais in academia. I personally know Thais who have studied and received a quality education abroad and come home to be sent to the back row because they don’t come from the right family.
So again, pray, tell us when, where and why has Thai working culture now come to embrace this Western value of meritocracy?
“His sentence, “In countries such as Burma, anarchy is feared far more than tyranny,” explains Burmese psyche very well”
It’s because they have had precious little experience of anything other than tyranny and anarchy. Better the devil you know.
Predictably the military used the name SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council) for the coup of 1988, just as they had saturated the land with signs saying “The rule of law and peace in the land first and foremost” during Ne Win’s caretaker government of 1958-60. Only it’s been too long on tyranny and short on anarchy as when 1988 saw a glimmer of change almost within reach but remains elusive. No pains no gains.
Whatever Prof MAT or any other learned expert says, change will come from within when the right elements interact between the army and the opposition. Democracy is convenient as a slogan and an ideal, not an end all and be all but only a means to an end. The Burmese will find their own way to get where they want. The best outsiders can hope for, foreign or expat, is to play the role of a catalyst once the sparks begin to fly.
If I interpret Professor Mc. Cargo’s speech right he makes an argument for a more regional, less centrally led government structure. This would involve shifting power from Bangkok to the provinces, which is a taboo subject at the moment in thai politics. What I wonder about is the role of the courts. Do they play any role at all?
Regarding the CFB saga and the ruling of the Constitutional court in November 2008, see LAOHONG K.-O. (2008) Three bills passed by NLA not legal. Bangkok Post, (November 6).
Key citation: ” The Constitution Court ruled yesterday that three pieces of legislation passed by the coup-makers’ National Legislative Assembly were not legal because the NLA lacked a quorum when it voted. The three bills, passed during the interim Surayud Chulanont government, are: the conflicts of interest bill, the community forest bill and the two- and three-digit lottery bill. ”
Why does Usher say the Northern Farmers’ Network is challenging the constitutionality of the bill and that as of January 2009 no ruling had been been in this matter? (p. 5 & 25). Has she missed the November 2008 ruling or is she talking about another case?
I believe the CFB was never actually published in the Royal Gazette, and thus never implemented, but I have yet to confirm this. Anyone has information on the post-2008 situation ? Strange that RECOFT’s newsletter did not mention the Nov 2008 ruling. I wonder why.
Another excellent report Nick.
It’s very sad – indeed alarming – to see Thais hurling such insults at each other, especially among those in the military.
Us farang should really only be observers – like spectators in the crowd commenting on how we think the fight is going at a Muay Thai stadium. It’s not our country – ultimately it’s their business, not ours.
But please Thais – step back from this brink.
Congratulations to New Mandala for publishing the report of these two excellent analyses by Boonbongkarn and McCargo.
They seem to support comments by Nick Nostitz from his on-the-ground reporting, that there is quite some common ground even between the Reds and Yellow : a consensus, waiting to be built on.
On de-centralisation – Bangkok has grown way beyond anything envisioned by Chulalongkorn.
All attempts at de-centralisation have failed. Is n’t it time for a more devolved, perhaps even federal system ?
I have n’t seen anyone mention that Thaksin eventually made his first fortune due to Thailand’s massively over-protected economy, its’ lack of an economic rationalist level capitalist playing field :
Thaksin won the exclusive right to supply computers to his own police department – without an open tender, if my memory serves me well of what Baker, Pasuk and others have written.
In other words : typical Thai rentier capitalism/ semi-fuedalism.
Nganadeeleg – giving legitimacy to coups is not necessarily seen as anti-democratic in Thailand, because of the 1932 revolution/ coup which was legitimised by the then king.
StanG – what information do you have for your optimistic assessment ? As far as I can see the main reasons why there has not been a coup so far are :
1) the military is very severely split. A coup now would very likely lead to all-out civil war, and the break-up of “Thailand”.
2) powerful foreign powers are exerting maximum opposition to a coup, for reason #1 – and reason #3.
3) a coup would be disasterous for the fragile economic recovery.
4) General Anupong especially seems opposed to a coup – and yes : important sections of the Palace also.
Where is the problem? It is common all over the world that admission to a university is based on arbitrary criteria like quotas and preferences, grades (anybody who has a slight idea about statistics knows that these do not conform to logic and thus rules of statistics), age, purchasing power (or income of the parents) etc. Why not morals? In principle, the regulation of access to a higher education, which in most cases implies a better future (higher income, lower risks of unemployment etc.) is based on political considerations. In fact, all these criteria have implicit moral connotations! Why not make these transparent in line with ideas of good government?
Anyway, the more important question is whether any of these criteria allow or secure that competent persons gain access, and if the university does not “stupidity” the students.
the issue is that Prem and the privy council and some of the rich families (royal businesses, banks, chicken people, etc) lead and use the military to repress the rest of the people of Thailand
the south and general repression of the people, refugees, etc is the plaything of the military which is motivated to continue involvement as they are a source/excuse for wealth and power
democracy threatens this rule by the elites but is the only way Thailand will progress
I guess the commentators also dont really want to solve the problems either….
There are different ways to convert the “will of people” into laws. Convincing Abhisit that the LM needs to be reviewed is one of possible solutions, and that could come through the media and civil society, and just general public opinion.
Some people would certainly have more influence on the process than others but that’s the reality of translating the will of 65 million people who generally don’t think too much on the subject.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
China and the Wa
Hla Oo/Moe Aung
…”Is it possible to describe a bit about your racial mix?” …Am an Assamese of Brahmin origin, which is the priestly class all over India. My forefathers about 20 generations ago migrated to Assam from Central India. Assamese are a mix of people- Hindus like the rest of India, Muslim like the one you met & good numbers of people of smaller ethnic groups like the Bodos, Ahoms(the rulers) etc of Tibeto-Burman and Tai origins.
The Assamese word for Burmese is “Maan” & when the Burmese invaded Assam; it was supposedly so brutal that we have a term called “Maanor Din” in our vocabulary(sparingly used though now), which means the Days of the Burmese. If you have similar folk narratives, that would be very interesting to compare.
Well historically many Assamese fled into the surrounding Naga hills and even today some Naga people look very plains Assamese. Legend has it that some even took refuge in the Hukwang valley never to be seen again. Unfortunately very little is known about the positive aspects of Burmese rule in Assam
Sufficiency democracy in action
[…] referendum of 2007 was a farce. This is what I wrote at the time: The referendum is a take-it-or-leave-it offer: if you want elections and a semblance […]
14.7 out of 45. An endorsement for the junta?
[…] remember that the outcome of this farce was that the constitution was endorsed by only 14.7 million of Thailand’s 45 million […]
Who is Abhisit’s true love?
[…] of 2007. Abhisit’s action has highlighted the fact that he owes his prime-ministership to the un-democratic chain of events set in place by the coup of September […]
The return of Thailand’s old friend
Maybe Disney Land is going to set up in Thailand. Someone near and dear, however, brought up a question as to whether numero doce was working with the Red Shirts. I doubt his mom would allow that.
The return of Thailand’s old friend
Ralph – much as I have disagreed with you in the past – I think
you are correct re. General Kriangsak.
I’ll add this : it is now becoming likely Anupong is being forced to step down, by certain very powerful Palace members – via an overseas trip. And that a coup is under way.
Make no mistake about this Queen Sirikit – if there is a coup now there will be no more Thailand.
Thailand burns – and Isaarn breaks free : under Chinese protection.
I’m just a soul whose intentions are good …
BKKLawyer: I would love to see an article specifically on this topic. I *hear* about meritocracy in Thailand, but I’ve certainly never witnessed it. I see Thailand as having an informal caste system that is SO informal that most Thais don’t even perceive or acknowledge it. Of course if you are a foreigner with the “correct” traits you can use these cultural biases to your advantage;-) Outward markers of social class can get you a VERY long way in Bangkok if you are prepared to play that game.
Self-sufficient Pyramid Scheme
The 16 self-sufficient provinces of Isaarn may soon break-away to form an independent Isaarn state, with more economic ties to China than the Generals’ “Thailand”.
Report on SOAS event, part I
Interesting comments by Giles Ungphakorn on his blog.
http://wdpress.blog.co.uk/
It looks like he managed to sneak in the seminar room together with some UK based Thai Redshirts – much to the dismay of the hosting Thai Embassy staff, ask some inconvenient questions and distribute leaflets.
I just wondered why this is not mentioned in your report or anywhere else..
I’m just a soul whose intentions are good …
StanG: You say “Thai working culture is more open to meritocracy than in those days.” A nice thought, seemingly innocuous. But contrary to everything we usually hear about Thai society.
You implicitly acknowledge that the Thai working culture previously was not open to meritocracy. Of course, Thai history is full of examples. When did this change, and what caused it?
I know few Thais who respect merit over the traditional “values” of wealth, seniority, the “right” ethnicity, etc. I hear of few such Thais in the news, even Thais in academia. I personally know Thais who have studied and received a quality education abroad and come home to be sent to the back row because they don’t come from the right family.
So again, pray, tell us when, where and why has Thai working culture now come to embrace this Western value of meritocracy?
Interview with Professor Michael Aung-Thwin
Hla Oo,
“His sentence, “In countries such as Burma, anarchy is feared far more than tyranny,” explains Burmese psyche very well”
It’s because they have had precious little experience of anything other than tyranny and anarchy. Better the devil you know.
Predictably the military used the name SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council) for the coup of 1988, just as they had saturated the land with signs saying “The rule of law and peace in the land first and foremost” during Ne Win’s caretaker government of 1958-60. Only it’s been too long on tyranny and short on anarchy as when 1988 saw a glimmer of change almost within reach but remains elusive. No pains no gains.
Whatever Prof MAT or any other learned expert says, change will come from within when the right elements interact between the army and the opposition. Democracy is convenient as a slogan and an ideal, not an end all and be all but only a means to an end. The Burmese will find their own way to get where they want. The best outsiders can hope for, foreign or expat, is to play the role of a catalyst once the sparks begin to fly.
Report on SOAS event, part I
If I interpret Professor Mc. Cargo’s speech right he makes an argument for a more regional, less centrally led government structure. This would involve shifting power from Bangkok to the provinces, which is a taboo subject at the moment in thai politics. What I wonder about is the role of the courts. Do they play any role at all?
Review of Thai Forestry: A Critical History
Regarding the CFB saga and the ruling of the Constitutional court in November 2008, see LAOHONG K.-O. (2008) Three bills passed by NLA not legal. Bangkok Post, (November 6).
Key citation: ” The Constitution Court ruled yesterday that three pieces of legislation passed by the coup-makers’ National Legislative Assembly were not legal because the NLA lacked a quorum when it voted. The three bills, passed during the interim Surayud Chulanont government, are: the conflicts of interest bill, the community forest bill and the two- and three-digit lottery bill. ”
Why does Usher say the Northern Farmers’ Network is challenging the constitutionality of the bill and that as of January 2009 no ruling had been been in this matter? (p. 5 & 25). Has she missed the November 2008 ruling or is she talking about another case?
I believe the CFB was never actually published in the Royal Gazette, and thus never implemented, but I have yet to confirm this. Anyone has information on the post-2008 situation ? Strange that RECOFT’s newsletter did not mention the Nov 2008 ruling. I wonder why.
Two soldiers
Another excellent report Nick.
It’s very sad – indeed alarming – to see Thais hurling such insults at each other, especially among those in the military.
Us farang should really only be observers – like spectators in the crowd commenting on how we think the fight is going at a Muay Thai stadium. It’s not our country – ultimately it’s their business, not ours.
But please Thais – step back from this brink.
Report on SOAS event, part I
Congratulations to New Mandala for publishing the report of these two excellent analyses by Boonbongkarn and McCargo.
They seem to support comments by Nick Nostitz from his on-the-ground reporting, that there is quite some common ground even between the Reds and Yellow : a consensus, waiting to be built on.
On de-centralisation – Bangkok has grown way beyond anything envisioned by Chulalongkorn.
All attempts at de-centralisation have failed. Is n’t it time for a more devolved, perhaps even federal system ?
I’m just a soul whose intentions are good …
I have n’t seen anyone mention that Thaksin eventually made his first fortune due to Thailand’s massively over-protected economy, its’ lack of an economic rationalist level capitalist playing field :
Thaksin won the exclusive right to supply computers to his own police department – without an open tender, if my memory serves me well of what Baker, Pasuk and others have written.
In other words : typical Thai rentier capitalism/ semi-fuedalism.
The return of Thailand’s old friend
Nganadeeleg – giving legitimacy to coups is not necessarily seen as anti-democratic in Thailand, because of the 1932 revolution/ coup which was legitimised by the then king.
StanG – what information do you have for your optimistic assessment ? As far as I can see the main reasons why there has not been a coup so far are :
1) the military is very severely split. A coup now would very likely lead to all-out civil war, and the break-up of “Thailand”.
2) powerful foreign powers are exerting maximum opposition to a coup, for reason #1 – and reason #3.
3) a coup would be disasterous for the fragile economic recovery.
4) General Anupong especially seems opposed to a coup – and yes : important sections of the Palace also.
The moral of University admissions
Where is the problem? It is common all over the world that admission to a university is based on arbitrary criteria like quotas and preferences, grades (anybody who has a slight idea about statistics knows that these do not conform to logic and thus rules of statistics), age, purchasing power (or income of the parents) etc. Why not morals? In principle, the regulation of access to a higher education, which in most cases implies a better future (higher income, lower risks of unemployment etc.) is based on political considerations. In fact, all these criteria have implicit moral connotations! Why not make these transparent in line with ideas of good government?
Anyway, the more important question is whether any of these criteria allow or secure that competent persons gain access, and if the university does not “stupidity” the students.
Report on SOAS event, part I
why do these people pussyfoot around?
the issue is that Prem and the privy council and some of the rich families (royal businesses, banks, chicken people, etc) lead and use the military to repress the rest of the people of Thailand
the south and general repression of the people, refugees, etc is the plaything of the military which is motivated to continue involvement as they are a source/excuse for wealth and power
democracy threatens this rule by the elites but is the only way Thailand will progress
I guess the commentators also dont really want to solve the problems either….
The evidence of intention
There are different ways to convert the “will of people” into laws. Convincing Abhisit that the LM needs to be reviewed is one of possible solutions, and that could come through the media and civil society, and just general public opinion.
Some people would certainly have more influence on the process than others but that’s the reality of translating the will of 65 million people who generally don’t think too much on the subject.