So who would Giles rather have as Head of State ?
Himself Giles perhaps ?
Being a Trotskyist a minimum requirement ?
Or Princess Sirindhorn ?
By the way, Giles – Thai taxes only apply to those earning over 16,000 baht per month. So the poor do not pay for the Royals.
Somsak – thank you very much indeed for 1957, Phibun v. Sarit. Very much appreciate your putting things in historical perspective.
Though of course, Thai society is now vastly different from 1957.
I opted for not responding to StanG and his like who apparently find personal conviction and communist Lao reports more solid that facts and on scene visits like the Herald.
It is a sheer waste of time arguing with total nonsense.
1. I am unable to access the website without some proxy program.
2. I won’t comment on the contents of Giles’ article, but I’d just like to remark that, if Thailand were to become a Republic, i.e. if a large number of people were to support such a move, it probably would have been for a more ‘systemic’ reason, and probably would have requiered argumentation of a far more legal, political and structural nature.
JJ: Just for the record: Actually the Assets Examination Committee was formed on 24 Sept. 2006 and reformed on 30 Sept. 2006. Surayud was appointed interim PM later in the day on 30 Sept. It’s not accurate to say he formed the Assets Examination Committee.
In “Populism, Pluralism, and Liberal Democracy,” Marc F. Plattner asserts that belief in democratic ideals will continue into the future despite the emergence of many new threats and challenges over the past decade. He believes “that liberal democracy today owes much of its resilience to the ways in which its two leading sources of internal opposition–populism and radical pluralism–are inherently at odds with each other.” The author concludes by emphasizing that the most effective way to ensure the continuance of democracy is for the populace to maintain its desire for an increasingly democratic government.
The scholars whom the culture held responsible for perpetuating the Khmer Buddhist world-view became the agents for re-examining it, reconfiguring it and composing new works so that it made sense in the emerging social and political landscape.
Though I’ve yet to read Hansen’s book, this sounds like a parallel to Michael Charney’s Powerful Learning, on state-backed Buddhist reform in 18th/19th century Burma.
Religious scholars have not quite figured out how to write the history of mainland Theravada Buddhism without privileging this strand of Buddhist practice as progressive, defining it as the vector of the future, and thereby classifying other Buddhist practice as unmodern or even anti-modern.
Is this not what both Justin McDaniel and Kamala Tiyavanich have done?
The Prime Minister seeks royal advice and then disregards it.
The King delivers unscripted speech.
Maybe I’m stupid, but how are they even in the same league?
Indeed, it’s not ‘in the same league’. The “PM disregarding HM advice” (which had no direct proof to begin with) is not a Constitutional violation. The other case is
Ditto signing off Sarit’s papers. He had the de facto power that couldn’t be undone just by not signing something. How old was the King at that time? Could he possibly challenge Sarit?
It’s not ‘sigin off Sarit’s papers’, it’s direct Royal Proclamation appointing Sarit. And it’s not the question of ‘challenging Sarit’ either. The issueing of the Proclamation was voluntary, hence the lack of counter-signature. Had it been the result of Sarit’s pressure (and the inability to challenge it), Sarit would have gladly provided counter-signature. (In fact, there’s evidence that Sarit was quite surprised to receive such a ‘helping hand’!)
Study history of this country’s politics throughly before asserting all the crap, please.
Glenn,
Thaksin was a telecommunications tycoon, long before politics.
If you look at the stock market returns for the years Thaksin was in office, his companies did ‘average’.
Thaksin, did balance the budget, paid off the IMF loan early, had the number one performing stock market in the world in 2003 and the lowest unemployment in a long, long time.
Thaksin is a successful, charismatic leader that knows how to get things done in a corrupt system.
The Privy council wanted this natural born leader to go since the upcoming ,(unworthy) son cant compare.
The charming guy had to go.
Thy guy takes the Prime Minister job after the 2006 coup, forms the asset examination committee, made up of Thaksins enemies, convicts him for paying full price for a piece of land at public auction, takes 76 billion baht and call him a fugitive from justice.
Meanwhile, it’s discovered he “owns” land and a house in a forest preserve with a bunch of bigshot friends.
Sick.
The Prime Minister seeks royal advice and then disregards it.
The King delivers unscripted speech.
Maybe I’m stupid, but how are they even in the same league?
Ditto signing off Sarit’s papers. He had the de facto power that couldn’t be undone just by not signing something. How old was the King at that time? Could he possibly challenge Sarit?
For those interested in history, in 1957 there was a split among left-wing activists whether they should support Phibun who, presiding over corrupt gov that he was, at least had more legitimacy than Sarit and his royalists allies, or to join the latter to try to overthrow Phibun instead. (The famous Jit Phumisak, I believe, advocated the latter course.) Similar split happened in 2006 too, with not much different outcome, namely the overwheming majority of activists prefered to press for the overthrow of Thaksin, instead of defending him.
I’ve always understood Sarit overthrew a rival military government.
Which “elected government’ was this, was it a civilian government, and how was it elected ?
Phibun’s government Sarit overthrew was elected by general elctions of 26 February 1957 (btw, apology for typo above, Sarit’s (first) coup happened in Sep 1957, not 58). Of course, there were allegations of widespread fraud and irregularitites (not unlike, perhaps, the last general elections Thaksin won in April 2006).
And while Phibun’s gov was not ‘civilian’ in the sense we would use now, it’s not purely military either. The military had been, by that time, under Sarit who had been increasingly hostile to Phibun. Phibun relied more on his henchman police chief Phao Sriyanon and his police force. I am not an admirer of Phibun or his gov, but the analogy between Sarit coup of 1957 that overthrew him and the 2006 coup that overthrew Thaksin is, in my view, quite striking.
Incidentally, I had used the analogy to warn the activists as early as February-March 2006 that by joining the protest against Thaksin led by the newly-formed PAD, we would all ended up like 1957, i.e. a coup that restored a monarchical power.
Even if this blog is over 2 years old I guess its never late to return and post here. Like the road itself and the part of the world where it sits everything moves slow. But maybe things are picking up lately a little bit. …
Btw what is interesting is the news of the Chinese made highway upto Tanai in Hukwang, Burma. Anybody from there who can give us a visual confirmation on the ground? Also looks like its India’s bit now to build the remaining piece to Ledo. Btw the Indian roads on the other side of Ledo are 4 lane highways. With the ‘security’ situation improved in its Northeast areas and ever increasing economic engagement with China, looks like old Stilwell’s going to roll once again into life!
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Patani and Turkey: What’s the connection?
A very interesting morsel to chew on in regard to the seemingly endless problems in the Thailand deep south………..thank you.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
So who would Giles rather have as Head of State ?
Himself Giles perhaps ?
Being a Trotskyist a minimum requirement ?
Or Princess Sirindhorn ?
By the way, Giles – Thai taxes only apply to those earning over 16,000 baht per month. So the poor do not pay for the Royals.
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
Somsak – thank you very much indeed for 1957, Phibun v. Sarit. Very much appreciate your putting things in historical perspective.
Though of course, Thai society is now vastly different from 1957.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
Um… it’s not blocked for me. I’m logging on from a Thai university.
Giles Ji Ungpakorn on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
It looks like this is a summary of thoughts Giles shared with an interviewer at a specific US – based Redshirt website last Monday.
While for the time being he had only occasionally made contributions there, they advertise now that he will do this from now on a regular base.
Abhisit’s definition of voluntary
I opted for not responding to StanG and his like who apparently find personal conviction and communist Lao reports more solid that facts and on scene visits like the Herald.
It is a sheer waste of time arguing with total nonsense.
Red Shirts at Surayud’s holiday paradise
” Colum Graham”
Seh Daeng signing shirts and people queuing up for it can be seen at most “red shirted” events, he seems doing this for hours.
Just before Bloody Songkran, I saw many redshirts having his signature on their back.
Now that he was recently suspended from military duty, he will have even more time for it…
Giles Ji Ungpakorn on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
1. I am unable to access the website without some proxy program.
2. I won’t comment on the contents of Giles’ article, but I’d just like to remark that, if Thailand were to become a Republic, i.e. if a large number of people were to support such a move, it probably would have been for a more ‘systemic’ reason, and probably would have requiered argumentation of a far more legal, political and structural nature.
Red Shirts at Surayud’s holiday paradise
JJ: Just for the record: Actually the Assets Examination Committee was formed on 24 Sept. 2006 and reformed on 30 Sept. 2006. Surayud was appointed interim PM later in the day on 30 Sept. It’s not accurate to say he formed the Assets Examination Committee.
Abhisit’s definition of voluntary
StanG:
Which “reports from Laos” are you referring to? This fairly recent one isn’t exactly reassuring:
http://www.smh.com.au/world/deported-hmong-held-by-lao-army-in-squalid-camp-20100112-m4uj.html
Review of Populism in Asia
The editors will probably not have been happy with this review (the publisher neither).
Anyway, on the issue of populism (and radical pluralism) being oppositional forces to democracy, see (can be downloaded from http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/gratis/Plattner-21-1.pdf ):
In “Populism, Pluralism, and Liberal Democracy,” Marc F. Plattner asserts that belief in democratic ideals will continue into the future despite the emergence of many new threats and challenges over the past decade. He believes “that liberal democracy today owes much of its resilience to the ways in which its two leading sources of internal opposition–populism and radical pluralism–are inherently at odds with each other.” The author concludes by emphasizing that the most effective way to ensure the continuance of democracy is for the populace to maintain its desire for an increasingly democratic government.
Review of Hansen
Though I’ve yet to read Hansen’s book, this sounds like a parallel to Michael Charney’s Powerful Learning, on state-backed Buddhist reform in 18th/19th century Burma.
Is this not what both Justin McDaniel and Kamala Tiyavanich have done?
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
The Prime Minister seeks royal advice and then disregards it.
The King delivers unscripted speech.
Maybe I’m stupid, but how are they even in the same league?
Indeed, it’s not ‘in the same league’. The “PM disregarding HM advice” (which had no direct proof to begin with) is not a Constitutional violation. The other case is
Ditto signing off Sarit’s papers. He had the de facto power that couldn’t be undone just by not signing something. How old was the King at that time? Could he possibly challenge Sarit?
It’s not ‘sigin off Sarit’s papers’, it’s direct Royal Proclamation appointing Sarit. And it’s not the question of ‘challenging Sarit’ either. The issueing of the Proclamation was voluntary, hence the lack of counter-signature. Had it been the result of Sarit’s pressure (and the inability to challenge it), Sarit would have gladly provided counter-signature. (In fact, there’s evidence that Sarit was quite surprised to receive such a ‘helping hand’!)
Study history of this country’s politics throughly before asserting all the crap, please.
Red Shirts at Surayud’s holiday paradise
Glenn,
Thaksin was a telecommunications tycoon, long before politics.
If you look at the stock market returns for the years Thaksin was in office, his companies did ‘average’.
Thaksin, did balance the budget, paid off the IMF loan early, had the number one performing stock market in the world in 2003 and the lowest unemployment in a long, long time.
Thaksin is a successful, charismatic leader that knows how to get things done in a corrupt system.
The Privy council wanted this natural born leader to go since the upcoming ,(unworthy) son cant compare.
The charming guy had to go.
Red Shirts at Surayud’s holiday paradise
Thy guy takes the Prime Minister job after the 2006 coup, forms the asset examination committee, made up of Thaksins enemies, convicts him for paying full price for a piece of land at public auction, takes 76 billion baht and call him a fugitive from justice.
Meanwhile, it’s discovered he “owns” land and a house in a forest preserve with a bunch of bigshot friends.
Sick.
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
The Prime Minister seeks royal advice and then disregards it.
The King delivers unscripted speech.
Maybe I’m stupid, but how are they even in the same league?
Ditto signing off Sarit’s papers. He had the de facto power that couldn’t be undone just by not signing something. How old was the King at that time? Could he possibly challenge Sarit?
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
For those interested in history, in 1957 there was a split among left-wing activists whether they should support Phibun who, presiding over corrupt gov that he was, at least had more legitimacy than Sarit and his royalists allies, or to join the latter to try to overthrow Phibun instead. (The famous Jit Phumisak, I believe, advocated the latter course.) Similar split happened in 2006 too, with not much different outcome, namely the overwheming majority of activists prefered to press for the overthrow of Thaksin, instead of defending him.
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
I’ve always understood Sarit overthrew a rival military government.
Which “elected government’ was this, was it a civilian government, and how was it elected ?
Phibun’s government Sarit overthrew was elected by general elctions of 26 February 1957 (btw, apology for typo above, Sarit’s (first) coup happened in Sep 1957, not 58). Of course, there were allegations of widespread fraud and irregularitites (not unlike, perhaps, the last general elections Thaksin won in April 2006).
And while Phibun’s gov was not ‘civilian’ in the sense we would use now, it’s not purely military either. The military had been, by that time, under Sarit who had been increasingly hostile to Phibun. Phibun relied more on his henchman police chief Phao Sriyanon and his police force. I am not an admirer of Phibun or his gov, but the analogy between Sarit coup of 1957 that overthrew him and the 2006 coup that overthrew Thaksin is, in my view, quite striking.
Incidentally, I had used the analogy to warn the activists as early as February-March 2006 that by joining the protest against Thaksin led by the newly-formed PAD, we would all ended up like 1957, i.e. a coup that restored a monarchical power.
The Stilwell Road
Even if this blog is over 2 years old I guess its never late to return and post here. Like the road itself and the part of the world where it sits everything moves slow. But maybe things are picking up lately a little bit. …
http://www.toboc.com/tradenews/myanmar-will-bring-china-and-india-closer-by-reopening-old-route/1429.aspx
Btw what is interesting is the news of the Chinese made highway upto Tanai in Hukwang, Burma. Anybody from there who can give us a visual confirmation on the ground? Also looks like its India’s bit now to build the remaining piece to Ledo. Btw the Indian roads on the other side of Ledo are 4 lane highways. With the ‘security’ situation improved in its Northeast areas and ever increasing economic engagement with China, looks like old Stilwell’s going to roll once again into life!
Review of Hansen
[…] […]