Comments

Actually, personal royal holdings of SET-listed companies have been listed for several/many years in the SET documents and CDs.

Amarin is interesting given its refusal to print a book said to be about the red shirts and their pressure on award-winning writer Wat Wallayangkur who was apparently forced to resign from a committee at Amarin Printing for being sympathetic to the red shirts (see http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2009/06/02/new-essential-stories/ and the link to Prachatai there).

Oh! and I should add that

Conversely, the more you are told to hate someone, the more you love him/her…

“Marc Askew”

Thanks a lot for the article and the images. They are very interesting and helpful. The government’s concentration of “unity” is somehow a sign for increasing helplessness towards a Thai society that is changing towards a pluralism. I fear that such drives towards loyalty and identification with the monarchy by the political parties of the government carries the danger of even further alienating the Red Shirts. If one side of the conflicts somewhat exclusively occupies loyalty to the institution, what does it imply then to their opponents?

The Red Shirts are rather free of royal symbolism compared to the extensive use under the PAD. The majority of ordinary Red Shirts are without doubt loyal to the King, though not militantly. The speeches on the stage usually do stress the point of Constitutional Monarchy as opposed to the PAD view of demanding an increased role of the monarchy in politics and society. Within the legal limits – they are two rather opposing philosophies.

As to the Blue Shirts – i am afraid that the issue goes much further than Newin and Bhum Jai Thai/MoI. Suthep has in an interview with the Nation already admitted that he himself was very much involved in the decision making process to use the Blue Shirts, which also corresponds to my previous information. My information is that also navy personal from Satthahip were part of the Blue Shirts, and i definitely know that PAD guards were there as well under the Blue Shirts as i have known them from last year during the Government House occupation.

Some responses from the author to comments

Sritanonchai: I take your point, though “Samakkhi” can better be translated as “fellowship” or “togetherness.” Regardless of this nicety, the point of the alliterative triad of “S” words is to emphasize that political division is subordinate to fundamental solidarities of national unity and wellbeing, and that turbulence is illegitimate. My point stands: that this part of the slogan essentially de-legitimizes dissent. As for expressions of loyalty to the monarchy at the red-shirt rallies, using the example of the national anthem – well, perhaps you weren’t present at the Victory Monument rally. There, rally speakers also explicitly emphasized loyalty to the monarchy. I do not believe my observations are inaccurate, though other expressions need to be taken into account, such as the quote that I use later in the piece. Numerous other expressions of loyalty to the king were made to me personally by red shirt rally attenders.

Leosia: regarding cost of signs – I’ve already given the basic figure of 10,000 baht for the 7X10 metre sign, exclusive of mounting costs. Some signs are much larger than this, as I’ve recently observed south of Hat Yai, Songkhla. As a minimum, just multiply 12,000 Baht by the total number of local government bodies in Thailand and you’ll get a minimum ball-park figure of the total outlay.

Kevin Hewison: Yes, this clearly reflects the increase in choreographed paranoia in its broader context. My aim in this piece was essentially to link the sign to the Bhumjai Thai Party’s control of the MoI and their own agenda. The original posting featured the subtitle: “The Politics of a Recent Billboard.” To confirm your wider point, the blue billboards are briefly mentioned in an essay “New Royalist Fears” appearing in the website Thai Political Prisoners http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/new-royalist-fears/

Based on the argument presented, the title should read “Signs of the Bhumjaithai Party” rather than “Signs of the Thai State.”

What is the real red shirt issue anyway?
Isn’t it regional economic inequality?

How much time and attention do all the learned academic commentators actually devote to the real issue? Not much.

If there were more vibrant provincial economies, rural people would not feel compelled to migrate to Bangkok on a seasonal basis. They would get treated better working as permanent employees at companies that actually pay taxes which would give local provincial governments their own sources of revenue, instead of relying on and assuming that it is their natural right that the center should subsidize the periphery by large amounts. More babies, more votes, more subsidies?

The notion that somehow by just redistributing money from the urban center to the periphery or by shifting governance to the provinces all the problems would disappear is just ridiculous.The provinces are where government officials put their hand in the til and avoid detection. The provinces are where the wishes of the rich and powerful are an unchallenged law.

The signboards make the legitimate point that unity and an end to protests is needed now. If the political conflicts continue on for many more years Thailand as a whole, including those from rural areas stand to lose economically.

Sure Thailand needs more than one pole of prosperity besides Bangkok. Investment rather than street protests or politically motivated handouts are the way to get there.

The signboard obviously targets specific recent events:

1. Recent interview comments by Thaksin
2. The FCCT speech of Jakrapob
3. Recent attacks on Prem the closest advisor to the King

The net effect to get people to shun the red-shirts until they change their ways and focus on the regional economic issues that really count.

Good point Nganadeeleg #2.
These by-elections certainly serve as an ideal rallying points for the Reds@SanamLuang this weekend.
On the other hand, the Talented Mr.Newin may have to reconsider his prime ministerial aspirations or pace it differently. This can be both bad and good for the Democrats (who clearly have only trouble mixing with BhumjaiThai – with the mega-corrupt bus lease, agriculture mortgage schemes etc…etc… – can anyone comment on the latter agriculture mortgage schemes? I’d like to be able to put my head around it more as it clearly has direct impact on the long-term plight of the rural poor). Good in the short term as BJT may moderate their appetite for gigantic government project commissions and take a more ‘sustainable’ long term route to winning the hearts of the rural voters from PMThaksin. Bad for the Democrats – “What the heck?” calculates the Genius Newin “Why go through all the trouble, let’s kiss and make up with PheuThai” (he might even be able negotiate the primiership from a desperate Thaksin!).

Both are highly plausible and will determine the route Thai Democracy takes to the next election…

I was naively thinking that all those billboards and other signs all over the country showing “we love the king” messages are erected by the local authorities due to their honest feelings towards the royalty. Well, seems like I have to correct my misconception to the reality at least partially…

As a loyal reader of New Mandala, I’m a bit disappointed that the only issue Andrew had a problem with was that the talk was part of the Abhisit PR campaign. The event should have been an opportunity for you to take your speaker to task and discredit the substance of the government’s narrative. Suchit is a reasonable, conciliatory type. He would have been willing to listen to your arguments, though he would probably be too polite to butt heads (which is a pity). His refusal to go into the issue of succession is understandable. It simply reflects the rabidity these days with which accusations of lese majeste are bandied about in Thailand.

I’m not surprised that the Thai students were quiet. Quiescence and respect for one’s betters are ingrained into Thais at a young age. Also, criticizing the government or addressing sensitive issues in an open forum was probably seen as too risky in the current political climate. But foreign academics should not be so restrained. This forum should have engendered a lively East-meets-West type of debate. It sounds like that didn’t happen. Did you have a chance to pursue things privately with Suchit later?

Two brief remarks.

First, could “samakkhi” not better be translated as “unity”? This is the same semantic field that Suchit Bunbongarn touched upon in the title of his talk at the ANU — “Building unity” (versus pluralism and tolerance). In a wider sense, the campaign is located in the ideological context of creating unity within the boundaries demarkated by the trinity of “Nation, Religion, and Monarchy.”

Second, regarding the statement of “red shirts made a point of solemnly standing to sing the national anthem at their rallies in April and declare devotion to the king,” I wonder whether the second part of the sentence is accurate. While I was standing with the UDD protestors while the national anthem was played on the public address system on Rajadamnoen Avenue, I’d rather say that their protest area was sort of “monarchy free.”

Does that law prohibit the investment, or just the disclosure of such?
It seems to be recommending the use of nominees – I wonder what the PAD think of that 🙂