Dickie…so many holes in your mailing I don’t know where to start [and I’ll ignore the facetious remarks- it says a lot about you), so lets look at just a couple: you attempt to ridicule alternative comments because they do not sit comfortably with your outlook and conditoned viewpoint- like the current politics in Thailand. FYI, the army were hardened border professionals consisting of regiments largely from Sakaew and Prachinburi – not kids from the Northeast as you claim. As for the court system, of course you are quite right, no “normal” court would make a judgement on flimsy evidence that is why you have to question: (a) is there any truth behind these allegations, (b) if you think there could be then investigate further where you are able to given the censorship in place, and see if there is a cover up, and (c) consider that even if there were substantial evidence at hand, which has happened numerous times over the past few years, would a Thai court, given the present constitution, actually make a fair, unbiased and reasoned decision? (use some discriminating wisdom and not get sucked into the current fiction)
The rule of law must be the first prerequisite. Without it there can be no “relatively fair election outcomes”.
Fair enough, but who does more violence to the rule of law? Those who engage in summary executions, which by the way has a long tradition in Thailand pre-Thaksin (not that that excuses him)? Or those who overthrow constitutions – the highest order legal norm in a liberal democracy – through military coups? Sure Thaksin violated many laws and often mocked the constitution, while the military (with the complicity of the PAD) were the ones who ultimately ripped it to shreds. There’s no grounds for being self-righteous about Thaksin if you were one of his hard-core opponents who supported military intervention (explicitly or tacitly).
The beleaguered Abhisit is the only player in this appalling mess who has consistently called for the rule of law, an all party constitutional reform process, and observance of human rights.
I’m seeing a pattern emerge with Abhisit. He has the habit of saying all the right things (he did a fine job with the FT interview) without showing any signs that he’s actually following through. When he first came to office, he said national reconciliation would be his first priority. He then let the insurrection charges against the PAD leaders languish on the back-burner until after the red uprising, when he promised again that he would push those cases forward (and I still have haven’t seen any progress on that front). We all saw what happened to the Rohingya. And enforcement of lese majeste laws have only gotten more aggressive on his watch. Now, it might be that he actually doesn’t have much power to change much in any of these areas. But even if he did, at the end of his day, they’re far from his top priority. So long as he just keeps saying the right things to placate foreign journalists and diplomats …
Dickie Simpkins, Colonel Jeru, I am impressed by Jim Taylor’s nationality and title. In these trying economic times, “the worst recession that we will face in our lifetime”(TM), I have to be impressed by everyone. Especially those who pay Australian tax.
I have to say that thus far, Jim Taylor’s heels and peach skirt are so much sexier than the cottage cheese thighs sitting on a Patpong curb displayed by yourselves. I’m not too sure when commenting on this website became an endeavor of legal consciousness. Perhaps everyone has realised that we’re in “the worst recession that we will face in our lifetime” (TM) and therefore, sphincters have tightened accordingly.
Articulating history immediately, I would have thought, is a hugely difficult thing to do, and impossible on such a large scale as a fortnight long revolt —- which is why first hand reports, such as the one provided by Nick Nostitz, are ever more valuable. All I find the lovely Jim Taylor to be doing is iterating a liberal view, that one should be open to questioning everything – all the ‘established facts’, he simply suggests things to counter what is immediately being considered as the history. Surely you can’t imagine Jim Taylor wandered under the NM bridge conscious of trolls who would only let him pass with referencing? Vichai N, Jeruchai whoever you are – (a satirical character invented by the NM writers(?) ) for “the worst (mental) recession we will face in our lifetime”(TM), my grandad was a better grandad than your grandad.
It will end in vote buying and nefarious corruption! Nepotism! Identity erosion! Demonisation! Coup d’etat! The rise of Hitler (elected democratically)! Chaos! FOOLS!
“The beleaguered Abhisit is the only player in this appalling mess who has consistently called for the rule of law”
Calling for and actually doing something about it is two different thing. If he has taken at least some action with regards to the PAD – other than to appoint one of them a Minister – his call for “rule of law” would have carried far more weight with this reader. As it is, it is simply political talk, lip service blah blah blah
In July 1932, Hitler and the Nazi party won a democratic election by almost 100 seats. Subsequent to this election, in 1933, Hitler passed the Enabling Law, which gave him absolute power, and never bothered with elections again. I assume when people mention Hitler and Thaksin in the same breath they are drawing attention to the fact that Thaksin, like Hitler, was elected and then proceded to undermine the foundations of democracy in order to consolidate his power. Similarly, while Thaksin did not commit genocide on the horrific scale of Hitler, he is widely believed to have been behind the extra-judicial killings of several thousand “drug dealers” and a number of suspicious deaths linked to the unrest in the South. The point of drawing comparison between Hitler and Thaksin is quite obvious. Democracy is the best system for selecting governments we have but garnering popular support does not automatically make a politician Nelson Mandela.
What is remarkable is that Thailand ever since Phibun Songkhram has really been upholding fascism. Not like Hitler, a bit like Mussolini, a little similar to Franco. Could we call it “lite fascism”? Maybe the next step is for Thailand to add US Patriots Act. That would bring them up to date.
Keyes’ analysis may be correct but the main issue for Thais who have tasted the material benefits of globalisation is can these magical beliefs, millennialism restore Thailand’s favored place as a site of production and investment for multinationals? In today’s Bangkok Post (7 May 2009) it reports that “the government faces borrowing another 800 Billion baht to stabilise its finances and pay for the second stage of its economic stimulus scheme…..”
Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij was quoted as saying:
“I am not worried about criticisms that the government is sending the country deeper into debt.
“People who criticise should tell me why these investment projects are not what the country and Thai people need.”
The borrowing would raise public debt to 58-61% of gross domestic product by 2012, up from its present 40%. Apparently, Korn is confident that the peak of 61% was “not too high”, based on international standards and when taking into account the effectiveness of the projects being funded.
Do you think magic and superstition played an important (tacit) role behind these decisions? The multinationals who have made money in Thailand obviously want to see that the conditions for future accumulation remain profitable or at least not worsened.
The questions I have are the following:
1. to what extent have these engrained irrational responses pervaded other dimensions of life in Thailand beyond the “political”?
2. why is there no renewed movement for Buddhist reformation in the Sangha?
3. If an “acceptable” solution can not be generated internally, will an externally engineered “solution” be the only recourse for multinationals with the help of their governments to safeguard their investments in Thailand?
If there is no single trajectory to progress and “development” does history augur well for the Thai people? That rather than “embracing the golden age of Suvarnabhumi again” (and all that crap), Thais will someday be ushered into an age of enlightened living, justice, equality and sufficiency for all?
From the point wherein I claim to ‘know’ Jim Taylor’s student, I was joking.
From claiming Abhisit’s sincerity, I was joking.j
For claiming that Jim Taylor’s “sources” and “evidences” being weak and possibly fabricated, I was serious. His evidences would not even hold ground at a court in Adelaide.
My point is that while there are many plausible stories and scenarios, there are just stories and scenarios. I watched an episode of CSI wherein they said there is no crime if there is no ‘body’. Unfortunately that is how justice works.
Why does it matter? Because of ‘burden of proof’.
Government claims ‘Red Shirts’ brought gas tanks and trucks –> more proof is needed beyond just ‘Chaiyasith Shinawat’ sits in the board of Siam Gas. Until then, the 3rd hand theory of government-sponsored ‘blue’ shirts is plausible and an acceptable alternative truth.
‘Red Shirt’ claims bodies were taken by the military –> more proof is needed beyond just fuzzy images taken from far away vdo cameras. You are right that good journos or investigative ones should’ve followed them; but lack of such evidence just means that the government/military receive benefit of doubt. As such, the alternative (alternative for this site it seems) truth that the military hauled injured people to the hospitals and would to most neutrals be acceptable.
Lest anyone forget, Infantry units are made up of boys between 17 till 22 years old, most just doing their conscription duties, and a majority too are from Isan, and many whose families are ‘red shirt’ sympathizers. ‘If’ there were dead bodies in the “hundreds” as claimed by Jim Taylor (and a very weak link to his ‘source’ at Prachathai) there would be without a doubt leaks and evidences at a mass scale.
I’m not so naive to believe not a single person got killed either. I really wish I got the taxi drivers name who told me he was at Din Daeng that fateful morning. I don’t think he will be following the Reds too close anymore, as he did feel used by them; as such, I don’t like to quote him too much as a ‘source’, but having heard a first hand account from him (including his tail of survival), I must say I really believe him when he told me that the deaths “if any” (as he was too far to be sure they were dead), was no greater than 5.
As for my choice of a name:
1. I have viewpoints that could endanger myself of people I am close to. I dislike that Thailand has no ‘free speech’ in particular relating to their institutions, and the fact that people use these institutions to cloak themselves from dissention.
2. Dickie Simpkins is one of the few NBA players to receive a 3 peat of championships… thats more than Allan Iverson has ever received for example…. so you gotta love a guy with a name like Dickie! 🙂
To conclude:
Jim Taylor will be much better off if he put himself in the high standards he claims the government/military to keep. His ‘sources’ without ‘evidence’ should take a note from Nick Nositz report and use terms like ‘alleged’ and ‘while there is no hard evidence, I’m inclined to believe because….’
Nick isn’t even an academic and his ability to use evidence and source citations is a world away from University of Adelaide Professor Jim Taylor.
[Aside] Readers need to be careful now of criticising the “independent” (5,5,5,5!!) Thai court; see below showing constitutional court representatives going to the police station to make a case to sue a person posting a blog insulting the court on the Sae-Daeng’s webboard. [BTW/Great stuff on this site- and in my view the guy, eccentric yes, is absolutely spot-on in his analyses].
Thanks amberwaves #20 on the very interesting point on racism, the antiwar and civil rights movement. I hope someone could enlighten us further whether it was/is a racist-minority or racist majority or just uncaring – or it is a matter of time and changing attitudes. (or it may come down to whether you have a generally optimistic or pessimistic outlook to life?)
Maybe a “little dismissive and patronizing” – just a little. If you read the whole last paragraph I wrote, we are in agreement.
A ‘handyman’ according to dictionary.com is “a person hired to do various small jobs.”
There are very very few ‘prouds’ to be called ‘Thaksin handymen’. That leaves me wondering therefore how a proud anthropologist from Adelaide ended up very busily doing ‘small handy jobs’ for Thaksin? I do hope you are not doing hand jobs purely out of conviction Jim Taylor . . .because you will be missing out on big juicy Thaksin handouts.
Thaksin and his handy men will do try very hard with disinformation to disfigure Thailand as an ultra-fascistic state where an honorable Thaksin or his likes, could be unfairly and unjustly persecuted merely because Thaksin and his likes had the courage to challenge an entrenched elite-favoring pro-monarchy corrupt establishment.
Come to think of it what Jim Taylor espouses is exactly the same theme regurgitated over and over again at New Mandala under the direction of Andrew Walker & Nick Farrely.
I am not sure whether I can understand your response without a translation into ordinary language (German or English).
Did you see that Hitler was mentioned in the post about Medhi’s presentation?
Note that my remark about Hitler refers to an element in the Thai discourse critical of Thaksin that tries in an instrumental (not an evidence-based analytical) way to equate him with Hitler. Remember that German-graduated law lecturer Banjerd had said something to the effect that Hitler had been more beneficial to Germany than Thaksin had been to Thailand, because, after all, Hitler built the Autobahn, etc., etc. (though Thaksin was also portrayed as a mixture of Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and Bin Laden)? Banjerd even seemed to have overlooked that Hitler, from 1933 onwards, had been a totalitarian dictator, and not the leder of an elected parliamentary majority. What about the Machtergreifung, by the way?
I do not appreciate “Hitler” being used as a label to attack Thaksin as one’s political enemies. Hitler is a historical phenomenon, and thus there are plenty of data available for a substantial analysis. However, any such analysis would undermine the intended effect of using “Hitler” as a label, because it would show how ridiculous such a comparison is, and how little those who use the label know about the historical Hitler, including the German political system of that time.
Maybe, you could volunteer to provide the audience at New Mandala with such a substantial comparison, even cross-national, since you seem to be well-familiar with the contexts in which people such as Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco rose to power…
Sidh S: Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t there a vociferous but small ANTI-racist movement in Australia? Is it not likely that had it not been highlighting the issue, the general drift of the silent majority might have been to accommodate racism? The same dynamic held for the US antiwar movement (and civil rights movement) in the 196os.
My point is that it is more than a little dismissive and patronizing to say that “I will not demand that NM give Thailand a fairer, more accurate treatment that it deserves” and that it’s simply a matter of people being free to express their biases.
Jim Taylor I will add that anonymity was equally if not more important during the tenure of Thaksin. A lot of peole got killed then that there was direct evidence of being killed and contrary to the meme not all were drug dealers or terrorists. I take it that you condemn those acts of state brutality under declared government policies of the time. I would also be interested in knowing how those events affect your assessment of the PM of the time as having done more for the country than any other PM.
Anonymity is also something that will need to be maintained imho if Jakrapob manages to overthorw everything and install his or his leaders new regime which wont be a period of enlightenment in my judgement.
At no point do I say things are wonderful now. they are not.
On a more general point postings on blogs/forum of a politcal nature are more often done anonymously than openly worldwide even in so called free countries.
Im not sure who has the most to lose as that is probably a value judgement we all make and Im sure to us and our families we all independently feel we have more to lose than another.
I agree with your assertion that “there is a hierarchy of factors, some of which are more important than others” if Thailand is to emulate the democratic models of the nations you suggest. What I disagree with is which prerequisites you attach the greater importance too. The rule of law must be the first prerequisite. Without it there can be no “relatively fair election outcomes”. This isn’t a righteous point of principle, it is purely practical truth. If the government indulges in criminality there is no obligation for the populous to recognize the legitimacy of the government. Indifference towards, or even support for the military coup from a very large section of the population empowered and enabled the military intervention. Had there been an overwhelming consensus that the ‘rule of law’ was being clearly and fairly applied (as is the case in the UK, US, Australia, etc.) any coup attempt would have been doomed before it even began. Surely the brazen criminality of the Thaksin regime was also the primary factor fueling the PAD leadership’s ridiculous ‘new politics’ ideas? The same perception that the rule of law is absent, or is applied partially, that is so angering the red-shirts was equally angering to those who opposed the TRT regime. People the world over overwhelming cherish their democratic rights, and become understandably very angry when they feel it they have been corrupted or stolen from them.
“The second is a constitution that is a social contract among the people based on national-consensus, not some draft put together in a dark room by the army’s hand-picked men.” I agree wholeheartedly, in fact this is an integral part of the first prerequisite in my view.
Free and fair elections should immediately follow implementation of a constitution agreeable to all sides. To hold elections prior to any such agreement would surely be pointless as the losers would cry foul and the cycle of instability (and probably violence) would begin afresh.
The beleaguered Abhisit is the only player in this appalling mess who has consistently called for the rule of law, an all party constitutional reform process, and observance of human rights. With the PAD threatening to take to the streets once more, and the military snuggling up in bed with Newin. Can Abhisit’s statements not be taken at face value? Wouldn’t cautious support for his stated position (whilst remaining heavily critical of all non-democratic actors) be a more ‘just’ position than to support an bloodthirsty extreme right movement which, despite wishful thinking to the contrary, is still dominated by its support for a very dangerous criminal?
This discussion has been very interesting and thought provoking, thank you for your insight. I regret that I won’t be able to continue the discussion further, I really wish I could, but with a struggling small business and a young family to support I really can’t justify the time. I will make a little time however to write a letter to Kasit Piromya and Chavarat Charnvirakul to protest the forced repatriation of this family-
Vichai N- we know where you are coming from!! These missing figures that you mention do come from my first-hand sources (who wish to remain anonymous), the posting #26 is an attempt to find some uncensored cyber links to show doubters…However as we know, alternative truths are so effectively muted by this fictitious fascist state and its representatives. All this and more has nothing to do with (a) my being an anthropologist, and (b) someone who thinks Thaksin actually did more for Thailand than other PM since or after…And so what if I were a Thaksin “handyman” (whatever that means!!) -is that a problem??? [- in fact I am only a “handyman” for my wife, my kids, my kru-ba-ajaan, and my employer]) 5-5-5-5-5
AjarnSomsak#17 – on the other hand if Chang Noi turns this into a repressive Monarchy Vs a liberal Democrat Thaksin would also be extremely ridiculous, pandering to a very narrow audience’s fetishes (many in NM).
I thought Chang Noi has struck the right balance on the proportionate action of each group based on available evidences. As my views in #8 and #15 suggests, I prefer to analyze based on the reported actions of each societal players. Many people here seem to take the Economist’s Orientalist gaze and are thus just not giving the highly diverse Thai Democracy stakeholders enough credit. Beyond those actions can only be guesswork…
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
Dickie…so many holes in your mailing I don’t know where to start [and I’ll ignore the facetious remarks- it says a lot about you), so lets look at just a couple: you attempt to ridicule alternative comments because they do not sit comfortably with your outlook and conditoned viewpoint- like the current politics in Thailand. FYI, the army were hardened border professionals consisting of regiments largely from Sakaew and Prachinburi – not kids from the Northeast as you claim. As for the court system, of course you are quite right, no “normal” court would make a judgement on flimsy evidence that is why you have to question: (a) is there any truth behind these allegations, (b) if you think there could be then investigate further where you are able to given the censorship in place, and see if there is a cover up, and (c) consider that even if there were substantial evidence at hand, which has happened numerous times over the past few years, would a Thai court, given the present constitution, actually make a fair, unbiased and reasoned decision? (use some discriminating wisdom and not get sucked into the current fiction)
The crushing of the Red Shirts
The rule of law must be the first prerequisite. Without it there can be no “relatively fair election outcomes”.
Fair enough, but who does more violence to the rule of law? Those who engage in summary executions, which by the way has a long tradition in Thailand pre-Thaksin (not that that excuses him)? Or those who overthrow constitutions – the highest order legal norm in a liberal democracy – through military coups? Sure Thaksin violated many laws and often mocked the constitution, while the military (with the complicity of the PAD) were the ones who ultimately ripped it to shreds. There’s no grounds for being self-righteous about Thaksin if you were one of his hard-core opponents who supported military intervention (explicitly or tacitly).
The beleaguered Abhisit is the only player in this appalling mess who has consistently called for the rule of law, an all party constitutional reform process, and observance of human rights.
I’m seeing a pattern emerge with Abhisit. He has the habit of saying all the right things (he did a fine job with the FT interview) without showing any signs that he’s actually following through. When he first came to office, he said national reconciliation would be his first priority. He then let the insurrection charges against the PAD leaders languish on the back-burner until after the red uprising, when he promised again that he would push those cases forward (and I still have haven’t seen any progress on that front). We all saw what happened to the Rohingya. And enforcement of lese majeste laws have only gotten more aggressive on his watch. Now, it might be that he actually doesn’t have much power to change much in any of these areas. But even if he did, at the end of his day, they’re far from his top priority. So long as he just keeps saying the right things to placate foreign journalists and diplomats …
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
Dickie Simpkins, Colonel Jeru, I am impressed by Jim Taylor’s nationality and title. In these trying economic times, “the worst recession that we will face in our lifetime”(TM), I have to be impressed by everyone. Especially those who pay Australian tax.
I have to say that thus far, Jim Taylor’s heels and peach skirt are so much sexier than the cottage cheese thighs sitting on a Patpong curb displayed by yourselves. I’m not too sure when commenting on this website became an endeavor of legal consciousness. Perhaps everyone has realised that we’re in “the worst recession that we will face in our lifetime” (TM) and therefore, sphincters have tightened accordingly.
Articulating history immediately, I would have thought, is a hugely difficult thing to do, and impossible on such a large scale as a fortnight long revolt —- which is why first hand reports, such as the one provided by Nick Nostitz, are ever more valuable. All I find the lovely Jim Taylor to be doing is iterating a liberal view, that one should be open to questioning everything – all the ‘established facts’, he simply suggests things to counter what is immediately being considered as the history. Surely you can’t imagine Jim Taylor wandered under the NM bridge conscious of trolls who would only let him pass with referencing? Vichai N, Jeruchai whoever you are – (a satirical character invented by the NM writers(?) ) for “the worst (mental) recession we will face in our lifetime”(TM), my grandad was a better grandad than your grandad.
Shock proposal! Use elections to sort out differences!
It will end in vote buying and nefarious corruption! Nepotism! Identity erosion! Demonisation! Coup d’etat! The rise of Hitler (elected democratically)! Chaos! FOOLS!
The crushing of the Red Shirts
Mungo Gubbins
“The beleaguered Abhisit is the only player in this appalling mess who has consistently called for the rule of law”
Calling for and actually doing something about it is two different thing. If he has taken at least some action with regards to the PAD – other than to appoint one of them a Minister – his call for “rule of law” would have carried far more weight with this reader. As it is, it is simply political talk, lip service blah blah blah
Volunteering to fight in Burma
KNLA Wah Lay Kee base camp has fallen [with pictures] by Daniel Pederson
http://www.danielpedersen.org/?cat=20&album=3&gallery=15
“Just leave him alone”
In July 1932, Hitler and the Nazi party won a democratic election by almost 100 seats. Subsequent to this election, in 1933, Hitler passed the Enabling Law, which gave him absolute power, and never bothered with elections again. I assume when people mention Hitler and Thaksin in the same breath they are drawing attention to the fact that Thaksin, like Hitler, was elected and then proceded to undermine the foundations of democracy in order to consolidate his power. Similarly, while Thaksin did not commit genocide on the horrific scale of Hitler, he is widely believed to have been behind the extra-judicial killings of several thousand “drug dealers” and a number of suspicious deaths linked to the unrest in the South. The point of drawing comparison between Hitler and Thaksin is quite obvious. Democracy is the best system for selecting governments we have but garnering popular support does not automatically make a politician Nelson Mandela.
Captive audience
What is remarkable is that Thailand ever since Phibun Songkhram has really been upholding fascism. Not like Hitler, a bit like Mussolini, a little similar to Franco. Could we call it “lite fascism”? Maybe the next step is for Thailand to add US Patriots Act. That would bring them up to date.
Another side of Thai political life
Keyes’ analysis may be correct but the main issue for Thais who have tasted the material benefits of globalisation is can these magical beliefs, millennialism restore Thailand’s favored place as a site of production and investment for multinationals? In today’s Bangkok Post (7 May 2009) it reports that “the government faces borrowing another 800 Billion baht to stabilise its finances and pay for the second stage of its economic stimulus scheme…..”
Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij was quoted as saying:
“I am not worried about criticisms that the government is sending the country deeper into debt.
“People who criticise should tell me why these investment projects are not what the country and Thai people need.”
The borrowing would raise public debt to 58-61% of gross domestic product by 2012, up from its present 40%. Apparently, Korn is confident that the peak of 61% was “not too high”, based on international standards and when taking into account the effectiveness of the projects being funded.
Do you think magic and superstition played an important (tacit) role behind these decisions? The multinationals who have made money in Thailand obviously want to see that the conditions for future accumulation remain profitable or at least not worsened.
The questions I have are the following:
1. to what extent have these engrained irrational responses pervaded other dimensions of life in Thailand beyond the “political”?
2. why is there no renewed movement for Buddhist reformation in the Sangha?
3. If an “acceptable” solution can not be generated internally, will an externally engineered “solution” be the only recourse for multinationals with the help of their governments to safeguard their investments in Thailand?
If there is no single trajectory to progress and “development” does history augur well for the Thai people? That rather than “embracing the golden age of Suvarnabhumi again” (and all that crap), Thais will someday be ushered into an age of enlightened living, justice, equality and sufficiency for all?
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
Snarls #30,
From the point wherein I claim to ‘know’ Jim Taylor’s student, I was joking.
From claiming Abhisit’s sincerity, I was joking.j
For claiming that Jim Taylor’s “sources” and “evidences” being weak and possibly fabricated, I was serious. His evidences would not even hold ground at a court in Adelaide.
My point is that while there are many plausible stories and scenarios, there are just stories and scenarios. I watched an episode of CSI wherein they said there is no crime if there is no ‘body’. Unfortunately that is how justice works.
Why does it matter? Because of ‘burden of proof’.
Government claims ‘Red Shirts’ brought gas tanks and trucks –> more proof is needed beyond just ‘Chaiyasith Shinawat’ sits in the board of Siam Gas. Until then, the 3rd hand theory of government-sponsored ‘blue’ shirts is plausible and an acceptable alternative truth.
‘Red Shirt’ claims bodies were taken by the military –> more proof is needed beyond just fuzzy images taken from far away vdo cameras. You are right that good journos or investigative ones should’ve followed them; but lack of such evidence just means that the government/military receive benefit of doubt. As such, the alternative (alternative for this site it seems) truth that the military hauled injured people to the hospitals and would to most neutrals be acceptable.
Lest anyone forget, Infantry units are made up of boys between 17 till 22 years old, most just doing their conscription duties, and a majority too are from Isan, and many whose families are ‘red shirt’ sympathizers. ‘If’ there were dead bodies in the “hundreds” as claimed by Jim Taylor (and a very weak link to his ‘source’ at Prachathai) there would be without a doubt leaks and evidences at a mass scale.
I’m not so naive to believe not a single person got killed either. I really wish I got the taxi drivers name who told me he was at Din Daeng that fateful morning. I don’t think he will be following the Reds too close anymore, as he did feel used by them; as such, I don’t like to quote him too much as a ‘source’, but having heard a first hand account from him (including his tail of survival), I must say I really believe him when he told me that the deaths “if any” (as he was too far to be sure they were dead), was no greater than 5.
As for my choice of a name:
1. I have viewpoints that could endanger myself of people I am close to. I dislike that Thailand has no ‘free speech’ in particular relating to their institutions, and the fact that people use these institutions to cloak themselves from dissention.
2. Dickie Simpkins is one of the few NBA players to receive a 3 peat of championships… thats more than Allan Iverson has ever received for example…. so you gotta love a guy with a name like Dickie! 🙂
To conclude:
Jim Taylor will be much better off if he put himself in the high standards he claims the government/military to keep. His ‘sources’ without ‘evidence’ should take a note from Nick Nositz report and use terms like ‘alleged’ and ‘while there is no hard evidence, I’m inclined to believe because….’
Nick isn’t even an academic and his ability to use evidence and source citations is a world away from University of Adelaide Professor Jim Taylor.
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
[Aside] Readers need to be careful now of criticising the “independent” (5,5,5,5!!) Thai court; see below showing constitutional court representatives going to the police station to make a case to sue a person posting a blog insulting the court on the Sae-Daeng’s webboard. [BTW/Great stuff on this site- and in my view the guy, eccentric yes, is absolutely spot-on in his analyses].
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajOpvOiGRoA&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fboard%2Esae%2Ddang%2Ecom%2FReadTopic%2Ephp%3Fno%3D14419&feature=player_embedded
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
Vichai N.,
We’ve missed you!
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Chang Noi on the “grey politics of survival”
Thanks amberwaves #20 on the very interesting point on racism, the antiwar and civil rights movement. I hope someone could enlighten us further whether it was/is a racist-minority or racist majority or just uncaring – or it is a matter of time and changing attitudes. (or it may come down to whether you have a generally optimistic or pessimistic outlook to life?)
Maybe a “little dismissive and patronizing” – just a little. If you read the whole last paragraph I wrote, we are in agreement.
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
A ‘handyman’ according to dictionary.com is “a person hired to do various small jobs.”
There are very very few ‘prouds’ to be called ‘Thaksin handymen’. That leaves me wondering therefore how a proud anthropologist from Adelaide ended up very busily doing ‘small handy jobs’ for Thaksin? I do hope you are not doing hand jobs purely out of conviction Jim Taylor . . .because you will be missing out on big juicy Thaksin handouts.
Thaksin and his handy men will do try very hard with disinformation to disfigure Thailand as an ultra-fascistic state where an honorable Thaksin or his likes, could be unfairly and unjustly persecuted merely because Thaksin and his likes had the courage to challenge an entrenched elite-favoring pro-monarchy corrupt establishment.
Come to think of it what Jim Taylor espouses is exactly the same theme regurgitated over and over again at New Mandala under the direction of Andrew Walker & Nick Farrely.
“Just leave him alone”
Maverick,
I am not sure whether I can understand your response without a translation into ordinary language (German or English).
Did you see that Hitler was mentioned in the post about Medhi’s presentation?
Note that my remark about Hitler refers to an element in the Thai discourse critical of Thaksin that tries in an instrumental (not an evidence-based analytical) way to equate him with Hitler. Remember that German-graduated law lecturer Banjerd had said something to the effect that Hitler had been more beneficial to Germany than Thaksin had been to Thailand, because, after all, Hitler built the Autobahn, etc., etc. (though Thaksin was also portrayed as a mixture of Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and Bin Laden)? Banjerd even seemed to have overlooked that Hitler, from 1933 onwards, had been a totalitarian dictator, and not the leder of an elected parliamentary majority. What about the Machtergreifung, by the way?
I do not appreciate “Hitler” being used as a label to attack Thaksin as one’s political enemies. Hitler is a historical phenomenon, and thus there are plenty of data available for a substantial analysis. However, any such analysis would undermine the intended effect of using “Hitler” as a label, because it would show how ridiculous such a comparison is, and how little those who use the label know about the historical Hitler, including the German political system of that time.
Maybe, you could volunteer to provide the audience at New Mandala with such a substantial comparison, even cross-national, since you seem to be well-familiar with the contexts in which people such as Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco rose to power…
Chang Noi on the “grey politics of survival”
Sidh S: Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t there a vociferous but small ANTI-racist movement in Australia? Is it not likely that had it not been highlighting the issue, the general drift of the silent majority might have been to accommodate racism? The same dynamic held for the US antiwar movement (and civil rights movement) in the 196os.
My point is that it is more than a little dismissive and patronizing to say that “I will not demand that NM give Thailand a fairer, more accurate treatment that it deserves” and that it’s simply a matter of people being free to express their biases.
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
Jim Taylor I will add that anonymity was equally if not more important during the tenure of Thaksin. A lot of peole got killed then that there was direct evidence of being killed and contrary to the meme not all were drug dealers or terrorists. I take it that you condemn those acts of state brutality under declared government policies of the time. I would also be interested in knowing how those events affect your assessment of the PM of the time as having done more for the country than any other PM.
Anonymity is also something that will need to be maintained imho if Jakrapob manages to overthorw everything and install his or his leaders new regime which wont be a period of enlightenment in my judgement.
At no point do I say things are wonderful now. they are not.
On a more general point postings on blogs/forum of a politcal nature are more often done anonymously than openly worldwide even in so called free countries.
Im not sure who has the most to lose as that is probably a value judgement we all make and Im sure to us and our families we all independently feel we have more to lose than another.
The crushing of the Red Shirts
tettyan #141
I agree with your assertion that “there is a hierarchy of factors, some of which are more important than others” if Thailand is to emulate the democratic models of the nations you suggest. What I disagree with is which prerequisites you attach the greater importance too. The rule of law must be the first prerequisite. Without it there can be no “relatively fair election outcomes”. This isn’t a righteous point of principle, it is purely practical truth. If the government indulges in criminality there is no obligation for the populous to recognize the legitimacy of the government. Indifference towards, or even support for the military coup from a very large section of the population empowered and enabled the military intervention. Had there been an overwhelming consensus that the ‘rule of law’ was being clearly and fairly applied (as is the case in the UK, US, Australia, etc.) any coup attempt would have been doomed before it even began. Surely the brazen criminality of the Thaksin regime was also the primary factor fueling the PAD leadership’s ridiculous ‘new politics’ ideas? The same perception that the rule of law is absent, or is applied partially, that is so angering the red-shirts was equally angering to those who opposed the TRT regime. People the world over overwhelming cherish their democratic rights, and become understandably very angry when they feel it they have been corrupted or stolen from them.
“The second is a constitution that is a social contract among the people based on national-consensus, not some draft put together in a dark room by the army’s hand-picked men.” I agree wholeheartedly, in fact this is an integral part of the first prerequisite in my view.
Free and fair elections should immediately follow implementation of a constitution agreeable to all sides. To hold elections prior to any such agreement would surely be pointless as the losers would cry foul and the cycle of instability (and probably violence) would begin afresh.
The beleaguered Abhisit is the only player in this appalling mess who has consistently called for the rule of law, an all party constitutional reform process, and observance of human rights. With the PAD threatening to take to the streets once more, and the military snuggling up in bed with Newin. Can Abhisit’s statements not be taken at face value? Wouldn’t cautious support for his stated position (whilst remaining heavily critical of all non-democratic actors) be a more ‘just’ position than to support an bloodthirsty extreme right movement which, despite wishful thinking to the contrary, is still dominated by its support for a very dangerous criminal?
This discussion has been very interesting and thought provoking, thank you for your insight. I regret that I won’t be able to continue the discussion further, I really wish I could, but with a struggling small business and a young family to support I really can’t justify the time. I will make a little time however to write a letter to Kasit Piromya and Chavarat Charnvirakul to protest the forced repatriation of this family-
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA39/004/2009/en
Perhaps others may wish to do likewise.
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
Vichai N- we know where you are coming from!! These missing figures that you mention do come from my first-hand sources (who wish to remain anonymous), the posting #26 is an attempt to find some uncensored cyber links to show doubters…However as we know, alternative truths are so effectively muted by this fictitious fascist state and its representatives. All this and more has nothing to do with (a) my being an anthropologist, and (b) someone who thinks Thaksin actually did more for Thailand than other PM since or after…And so what if I were a Thaksin “handyman” (whatever that means!!) -is that a problem??? [- in fact I am only a “handyman” for my wife, my kids, my kru-ba-ajaan, and my employer]) 5-5-5-5-5
Chang Noi on the “grey politics of survival”
AjarnSomsak#17 – on the other hand if Chang Noi turns this into a repressive Monarchy Vs a liberal Democrat Thaksin would also be extremely ridiculous, pandering to a very narrow audience’s fetishes (many in NM).
I thought Chang Noi has struck the right balance on the proportionate action of each group based on available evidences. As my views in #8 and #15 suggests, I prefer to analyze based on the reported actions of each societal players. Many people here seem to take the Economist’s Orientalist gaze and are thus just not giving the highly diverse Thai Democracy stakeholders enough credit. Beyond those actions can only be guesswork…