“reforming and strengthening democratic institutions that addresses the balance of power, the rule of law, corruption and abuses of state power. ”
yes, we agree…. and do you think that Prem and the senior military are helping or hindering progress towards these fine ideals?
what steps are needed for implementation? do you agree that reducing the power and influence of Prem and the generals would be a significant step in the right direction?
how do you suggest the “national heroes” are going to be able to come into play?
do you think the “national heroes” should just wait for their opportunity or should they try to build or attach to a constituency that will carry them into position to implement their objectives?
There are two salient, orthogonal dimensions to the political problem in Thailand.
One dimension has endpoints in dictatorship and democracy.
The second has endpoints in the least profit for the smallest number and the greatest profit for the largest number.
The yellows and the reds lie at opposite ends of the first dimension.
If the reds are essentially Thaksinistas then the yellows and the reds are not separated along the second dimension but lumped together at the least profit for the smallest number end. Rival gangs fighting over the same spoils. But Thaksin has created his power base by the novel ploy, by Thai standards, of tossing some crumbs to the people, and as far as the people are concerned something is better than nothing.
All of us on the planet would like to have a government as close to the democratic end of the first dimension and as close to the greatest profit for the largest number end of the second.
Given a distinction without a real difference along the second dimension we will differentiate along the first, and so do the Thai people. Without elections there is no hope of change for the better. The next step in the “political reform” by the yellows is disenfranchisement.
All the while we hope that the reds will realize that it is up to them, not their “leaders”, to enunciate their own goals and methods. In fact the reds’ present, seeming defeat ought to stimulate them to go home and do just that. The reds need to build a shadow government, their own new politcal party with leaders chosen from among themselves at the Ban, Tambon, Amphoe, and Jangwat levels in every province. And all the while to push as hard as they can for elections.
So it seems to me. I need not remind you all that I am just another Bozo on the bus.
Jim Taylor #4, I agree lets look as many sources as possible and make up your own mind. That is all I did. I will just caution that a radicalized mind will see and believe what they want to see and believe. In that scenario, the person and/or groups of people end up with ONE TRUTH regardless of the facts and evidences. Look you accused all the Thai major dailies of “skewing the facts” and now, in comment#10, even CNN. This is siege mentality. That is how we ended up with the extremes of ASTV and DTV and why Thailand’s NBT and the former ITV must be encouraged to evolve to resemble what we have here in Australia, ABC and SBS – public television that accommodates multiple, conflicting points of views, ideologies within the same, usually open, forums…
PMThaksin subjecting himself to hard questions is very rare and must have been a critical democracy lesson 101 for him. Ofcourse he did not answer the very hard questions and has distanced himself from the Reds and the violence they perpetuated throughout Bangkok. His role, he says, was merely “morale support” to the protestors.
PMThaksin has also said a few times in his daily video phone-ins that he will return to Thailand and lead from the front if the government cracks down on the Reds. The last time was as recent as Sunday evening:
Yes, PMThaksin seemed to have fooled his fans once again (and I sympathize with the Reds here)… And in a convoluted way of answering my fellow Thai, David Brown’s #49 question, let’s not pin our hope on any one person to solve the country’s ills anymore. What we need is the reforming and strengthening democratic institutions that addresses the balance of power, the rule of law, corruption and abuses of state power. We have witnessed many cycles of breaking the laws to get people who broke the law trialed and convicted – and there’s an opportunity, amidst this chaotic and lawlessness time, to finally end the cycle and move forward. This will not happen today or tomorrow, it will take years and a lot of patience – and maybe space for a handful of heroes.
See David Streckfuss’ article “A call for real national heroes: stand and be judged” in today’s Bangkokpost:
Fortunately for the country, the Reds are dispersing now and Bangkokians are breathing a sigh of relief. The drama will certainly continue in some unpredictable and surprising shapes and forms that characterizes Thai politics. May it be peaceful and progressive. Hopefully now everyone can enjoy what’s left of Songkran Holidays.
Massive corruption did you say? Thai people did not want? For whom do you speak. If you truly speak for the Thais, Please explain the election results? Please do not go on about the vote buying etc. etc.. The arguement for this accusation defies logic.
Reasons –
1. Election commision appointed by Military Junta
2. Election supervision – by Military Junta
3. Judiatiary – By Military Junta
4. Press (snigger) – By Military Junta
If the PPP could still have ducked under all that and bought votes, then you military is terribly incompetent.
BTW – please do not tell me how the democrats are clean as the driven snow (it doesn’t snow in Thailand)
Given all that, the Thai people did speak – they spoke for Thaksin and the PPP. That my young student friend is the majority of Thai people – not your declaration.
Anyway, one cannot debate with a law enforcing authority that sees it alright to appoint a leading member of “airport seizure” group as a Minister. can you?
I feel very sad for the Thai royalty after reading your article.
However, when I read your article, I feel as if you are portraying Thaksin as an innocent victim. I feel that your article should also mention other reasons that Thai people did not want to accept Thaksin’s rule, such as his enormous corruptions.
It is true that the royalty were used for main political puppet for reasons to getting rid of Thaksin’s government, but since this article is also related to politics, I think you should also point out that Thaksin does more than just his modernized “CEO-style leadership…..”. His leaderships were not accepted by the Thais because they see that it is increasingly more similar to Indonesia’s PM Suharto’s style of family-owned economies, as well as corruption in the government. The Thais have been sick but tolerant of corruption in the government for really long time, but none has been able to mobilize this much economy and power in the country.
For this and also other reasons, that the Thais start to feel insecure for their royal institution’s future. Hence, the use of royal puppet.
This is generally a very good article indeed, except for one paragraph dealing with the discussion on the monarchy at the ICTS, where Andrew and Nick write in part:
It would be academic narcissism to suggest that the conference was an important turning point in Thai public life, but it did provide some support and encouragement for those in Thailand who are working towards a more mature public discussion of royal power.
I wouldn’t regard your take on the Conference discussion as ‘academic narcissim’. But frankly where’s evidence of it ‘provid[ing]…support and encouragement for those in Thailand who are working towards a more mature public discussion of royal power’? I think I can, without narcissim either, regard myself as one of ‘those’ you mention here. And without wishing to be un-grateful, I simply don’t feel any impact of the Conference discussion, and from where I am, I can’t see it having any noticeable impact on anyone either. (Perhaps, Somchai of Chianmai U or Pravit of The Nation who took part in the Conference might have acted a bit differently after the Conference? But not that much in my view.) This is just a realistic assessment.
(11.50, 14 April 2009, at the moment the Red Shirts rally ending, their leaders surrendering to the surrounding police and soldiers)
I confess I haven’t read the piece so I can’t comment on the quality of journalism. But I can safely say that high-quality journalism in Malaysia is a rare thing.
I and others independents find it all to predictable that when officisls of western governments or other ‘fat cats’ such as tenured academics like Andrew W. from ANU ( an Australian government university) or Wendell K. from KPI ( a Thai government-funded quango) express opinions they always downplay Thaksin’s wholesale rollback of all democratic checks and balances while PM.
For example, last weekend on Australianetwork.com there was little in the way of a balanced assessment of Mr. Thaksin’s democratic credentials by Mr. Walker beyond the mantra of ‘democratically-elected’ – the humbug of which Human Rights Watch International is on the record as roundly condeming. Taking a rather charitable view, it seems either Mr. Walker doesn’t know any better (in which case he should be sensationalizing things for Aljazeera) or he should reconsider his association with a network which so heavily edits that it’s analysis is just as misleading.
While I understand it is highly unlikely that such careerists will ever bite the government hand that feeds them, I suggest that if the network wishes to be more credible to local viewers here in Bangkok, it forgo the easy link to ANU and find someone different with real credibility outside the ivory towers of tenured academia.
Following is what today Sydney Morning Herald quoted from Jakropob Penkair, the Red-Shirts Leader.
“We are fighting for a modern democratic society, rather than the elitist model that dominated Thailand for so long with massive behind the scenes influence wielded by unelected officials, the judiciary, and the military.”
“Equality appears to be new in Thailand; I believe it is happening to Thailand right now,” he even added.
I totally agree with that statement. The brave masses of Thailand are now staging a new revolution to massively reform the patronizing, paternalistic, and oppressive system of so-called democracy widely practiced in Thailand and most SE Asia countries.
One of the great tragedies of Black Songkran has been the death of journalism in Thailand, with the English language press, the Nation and the Bangkok Post, rushing to prostitute themselves to the party line of the Bangkok elite.
If you read the headlines and stories in this morning’s English-language papers, you would think that the only fighting going on in Bangkok is among red shirts and local residents, with virtually no mention of the massive armed military presence which itself resembles an uncontrolled mob in some places.
We were first told that soldiers were firing live ammunitionm but only in the air. When we saw BBC videos of troops firing directly at people, we were told that they were using blanks, When we heard people had died, we were told that it was people shooting people, and that all those soldiers were shooting clouds.
It’s a tragedy to see people dying in the streets of one of Asia’s great capitals in what may well be a misguided fight for democracy. But it’s an even greater tragedy to see the free press die, as those who style themselves “journalists” rush to become concubines of a feckless government without shame.
Tuesday morning 14-04-2009 at 9.00 a.m. I tried to access the thaienews.blogspot from inside Thailand and it was being blocked by the Thai government censors. The warning message in English states that “This URL has been blocked by a Court Order…” which is most likely a lie because their habit is to block first and get a court order later, if ever. Now I am interested to see how many other photo sites are being blocked.
No I was not referring specifically to ANU alumnus, but after reading your post perhaps it is time for you to graduate into the real world? Suriyasai has called for the mobs to back the army and illicit government as agent provocateurs- as if they need such a black force against an unarmed mass demonstration; pathetic. Meanwhile as in October 1976 the army will do the dirty work with the media as one voice lambasting the reds , shoot a few unarmed demonstrators and then…in a couple of days Prem will come out of hiding and save the day reinstating the Democrat Party as illegitimate heirs to the political throne all the time mouthing about democracy… (Now even the CNN shows repetitive pictures of single incidence of anger – and its reportage is atrocious: note how many times do we see the bus collision pic!!) What about the deaths? the bloodletting from “blanks”? Where are transparency, fairness and justice? People have short memories of the direct involvement of Abhisit and his elite military cronies supporting the yellows carrying weapons to heap destruction on the nation.
Seeing a neighboring country like Malaysia produces a competent journalist, has made me realize the level of educational difference between Thailand and Malaysia. I hope as ASEAN further integrates, the Malaysian Insiders could expand their business to Thailand. Besides Prachatai and Matichon, Thailand has no quality newspaper.
I would like to point out Montesano’s good arguments.
1. I think it is accurate to say that the current situation reflects the majority of Thai people across the country is challenging the “network monarchy.” Indeed, it has hindered Thailand’s modernization. If Thailand current sovereign hadn’t play an active role in his government in the past three or four decades, Thailand’s economic base would have joined the rank of Singapore. Instead, Thailand is now broke; the country has minus 4% GDP, two millions unemployed, and jumbo loans from international finance institutions, while the monarch is the world richest with lese majeste impunity.
2. In the realm of polity, the “network monarchy”continues to enforce its “patron-client tied” structure. Instead of reforming, it turns toward applying coercive force, mastermind method, and “network monarchy” intervention to maintain its control in judicial, political, executive, and security branches. As a result, we have a strong bureaucratic state, where the element of market is unable to emerge and grow. And discontent among the governed has spread across the land to every provinces.
It is time for an open and productive discuss whether it is a better path for Thailand to change to presidential system where Thai people can directly elect its leader to the Republic, as a solution to its political turmoil. Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines seem to be successful in their transition to democracy. I think this may be the change Thailand needs.
Bangkok Pundit has started a thread on that topic – in addition to the unmentionable, I think it is clear that they did not want Abhisit enhancing his credibility from a successful ASEAN summit, and there is also the upcoming court case concerning a small matter of 73 billion baht!
2. Why not retreat now, let the dust settle, give the powers a chance to initiate genuine political reform, regroup later if necessary?
The answer to that is less clear, but I expect ‘stubborn bloodymindedness’ and ‘aversion to loss of face’ are part of the equation on behalf of the leaders (on both sides), and amongst the followers I expect its hard to come down from a ‘rush of blood’.
nganadeeleg –
Why now? I can’t really say. But if they were foolish enough to start this kind of stuff, I wouldn’t expect them to be wise enough to stop it.
I guess the figure they they are in to deep to get out.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thailand’s royal sub-plot
Looks like it will be a while you before the country can move beyond Thaksin – keep up the support guys!
Crackdown on the reds?
Sidh S #59
“reforming and strengthening democratic institutions that addresses the balance of power, the rule of law, corruption and abuses of state power. ”
yes, we agree…. and do you think that Prem and the senior military are helping or hindering progress towards these fine ideals?
what steps are needed for implementation? do you agree that reducing the power and influence of Prem and the generals would be a significant step in the right direction?
how do you suggest the “national heroes” are going to be able to come into play?
do you think the “national heroes” should just wait for their opportunity or should they try to build or attach to a constituency that will carry them into position to implement their objectives?
Andrew Walker on SBS radio
There are two salient, orthogonal dimensions to the political problem in Thailand.
One dimension has endpoints in dictatorship and democracy.
The second has endpoints in the least profit for the smallest number and the greatest profit for the largest number.
The yellows and the reds lie at opposite ends of the first dimension.
If the reds are essentially Thaksinistas then the yellows and the reds are not separated along the second dimension but lumped together at the least profit for the smallest number end. Rival gangs fighting over the same spoils. But Thaksin has created his power base by the novel ploy, by Thai standards, of tossing some crumbs to the people, and as far as the people are concerned something is better than nothing.
All of us on the planet would like to have a government as close to the democratic end of the first dimension and as close to the greatest profit for the largest number end of the second.
Given a distinction without a real difference along the second dimension we will differentiate along the first, and so do the Thai people. Without elections there is no hope of change for the better. The next step in the “political reform” by the yellows is disenfranchisement.
All the while we hope that the reds will realize that it is up to them, not their “leaders”, to enunciate their own goals and methods. In fact the reds’ present, seeming defeat ought to stimulate them to go home and do just that. The reds need to build a shadow government, their own new politcal party with leaders chosen from among themselves at the Ban, Tambon, Amphoe, and Jangwat levels in every province. And all the while to push as hard as they can for elections.
So it seems to me. I need not remind you all that I am just another Bozo on the bus.
Battle at Dindaeng, Bangkok, 13 April 2009
Jim Taylor #4, I agree lets look as many sources as possible and make up your own mind. That is all I did. I will just caution that a radicalized mind will see and believe what they want to see and believe. In that scenario, the person and/or groups of people end up with ONE TRUTH regardless of the facts and evidences. Look you accused all the Thai major dailies of “skewing the facts” and now, in comment#10, even CNN. This is siege mentality. That is how we ended up with the extremes of ASTV and DTV and why Thailand’s NBT and the former ITV must be encouraged to evolve to resemble what we have here in Australia, ABC and SBS – public television that accommodates multiple, conflicting points of views, ideologies within the same, usually open, forums…
Crackdown on the reds?
In case anyone missed the classic PMThaksin BBC interview yesterday:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7996781.stm
PMThaksin subjecting himself to hard questions is very rare and must have been a critical democracy lesson 101 for him. Ofcourse he did not answer the very hard questions and has distanced himself from the Reds and the violence they perpetuated throughout Bangkok. His role, he says, was merely “morale support” to the protestors.
PMThaksin has also said a few times in his daily video phone-ins that he will return to Thailand and lead from the front if the government cracks down on the Reds. The last time was as recent as Sunday evening:
http://www.matichon.co.th/matichon/view_news.php?newsid=01p0101130452§ionid=0101&day=2009-04-13
Yes, PMThaksin seemed to have fooled his fans once again (and I sympathize with the Reds here)… And in a convoluted way of answering my fellow Thai, David Brown’s #49 question, let’s not pin our hope on any one person to solve the country’s ills anymore. What we need is the reforming and strengthening democratic institutions that addresses the balance of power, the rule of law, corruption and abuses of state power. We have witnessed many cycles of breaking the laws to get people who broke the law trialed and convicted – and there’s an opportunity, amidst this chaotic and lawlessness time, to finally end the cycle and move forward. This will not happen today or tomorrow, it will take years and a lot of patience – and maybe space for a handful of heroes.
See David Streckfuss’ article “A call for real national heroes: stand and be judged” in today’s Bangkokpost:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/15024/a-call-for-real-national-heroes-stand-and-be-judged
Fortunately for the country, the Reds are dispersing now and Bangkokians are breathing a sigh of relief. The drama will certainly continue in some unpredictable and surprising shapes and forms that characterizes Thai politics. May it be peaceful and progressive. Hopefully now everyone can enjoy what’s left of Songkran Holidays.
Thailand’s royal sub-plot
Sorry Student,
Massive corruption did you say? Thai people did not want? For whom do you speak. If you truly speak for the Thais, Please explain the election results? Please do not go on about the vote buying etc. etc.. The arguement for this accusation defies logic.
Reasons –
1. Election commision appointed by Military Junta
2. Election supervision – by Military Junta
3. Judiatiary – By Military Junta
4. Press (snigger) – By Military Junta
If the PPP could still have ducked under all that and bought votes, then you military is terribly incompetent.
BTW – please do not tell me how the democrats are clean as the driven snow (it doesn’t snow in Thailand)
Given all that, the Thai people did speak – they spoke for Thaksin and the PPP. That my young student friend is the majority of Thai people – not your declaration.
Anyway, one cannot debate with a law enforcing authority that sees it alright to appoint a leading member of “airport seizure” group as a Minister. can you?
Thailand’s royal sub-plot
I feel very sad for the Thai royalty after reading your article.
However, when I read your article, I feel as if you are portraying Thaksin as an innocent victim. I feel that your article should also mention other reasons that Thai people did not want to accept Thaksin’s rule, such as his enormous corruptions.
It is true that the royalty were used for main political puppet for reasons to getting rid of Thaksin’s government, but since this article is also related to politics, I think you should also point out that Thaksin does more than just his modernized “CEO-style leadership…..”. His leaderships were not accepted by the Thais because they see that it is increasingly more similar to Indonesia’s PM Suharto’s style of family-owned economies, as well as corruption in the government. The Thais have been sick but tolerant of corruption in the government for really long time, but none has been able to mobilize this much economy and power in the country.
For this and also other reasons, that the Thais start to feel insecure for their royal institution’s future. Hence, the use of royal puppet.
Feel free to correct me in appropriate manner.
Thailand’s royal sub-plot
This is generally a very good article indeed, except for one paragraph dealing with the discussion on the monarchy at the ICTS, where Andrew and Nick write in part:
It would be academic narcissism to suggest that the conference was an important turning point in Thai public life, but it did provide some support and encouragement for those in Thailand who are working towards a more mature public discussion of royal power.
I wouldn’t regard your take on the Conference discussion as ‘academic narcissim’. But frankly where’s evidence of it ‘provid[ing]…support and encouragement for those in Thailand who are working towards a more mature public discussion of royal power’? I think I can, without narcissim either, regard myself as one of ‘those’ you mention here. And without wishing to be un-grateful, I simply don’t feel any impact of the Conference discussion, and from where I am, I can’t see it having any noticeable impact on anyone either. (Perhaps, Somchai of Chianmai U or Pravit of The Nation who took part in the Conference might have acted a bit differently after the Conference? But not that much in my view.) This is just a realistic assessment.
(11.50, 14 April 2009, at the moment the Red Shirts rally ending, their leaders surrendering to the surrounding police and soldiers)
Montesano on Thailand’s crisis
Susie Wong,
Please note that Montesano’s piece is syndicated from The Straits Times of Singapore, which is government-backed.
From what info I could find, he is “Assistant Professor in the Southeast Asian Programme at the National University of Singapore.”
http://www.nus.edu.sg/nuspress/subjects/history/978-9971-69-411-1.html
I confess I haven’t read the piece so I can’t comment on the quality of journalism. But I can safely say that high-quality journalism in Malaysia is a rare thing.
Andrew Walker on SBS radio
I and others independents find it all to predictable that when officisls of western governments or other ‘fat cats’ such as tenured academics like Andrew W. from ANU ( an Australian government university) or Wendell K. from KPI ( a Thai government-funded quango) express opinions they always downplay Thaksin’s wholesale rollback of all democratic checks and balances while PM.
For example, last weekend on Australianetwork.com there was little in the way of a balanced assessment of Mr. Thaksin’s democratic credentials by Mr. Walker beyond the mantra of ‘democratically-elected’ – the humbug of which Human Rights Watch International is on the record as roundly condeming. Taking a rather charitable view, it seems either Mr. Walker doesn’t know any better (in which case he should be sensationalizing things for Aljazeera) or he should reconsider his association with a network which so heavily edits that it’s analysis is just as misleading.
While I understand it is highly unlikely that such careerists will ever bite the government hand that feeds them, I suggest that if the network wishes to be more credible to local viewers here in Bangkok, it forgo the easy link to ANU and find someone different with real credibility outside the ivory towers of tenured academia.
On the Songkran crisis of 2009
Following is what today Sydney Morning Herald quoted from Jakropob Penkair, the Red-Shirts Leader.
“We are fighting for a modern democratic society, rather than the elitist model that dominated Thailand for so long with massive behind the scenes influence wielded by unelected officials, the judiciary, and the military.”
“Equality appears to be new in Thailand; I believe it is happening to Thailand right now,” he even added.
I totally agree with that statement. The brave masses of Thailand are now staging a new revolution to massively reform the patronizing, paternalistic, and oppressive system of so-called democracy widely practiced in Thailand and most SE Asia countries.
On the Songkran crisis of 2009
One of the great tragedies of Black Songkran has been the death of journalism in Thailand, with the English language press, the Nation and the Bangkok Post, rushing to prostitute themselves to the party line of the Bangkok elite.
If you read the headlines and stories in this morning’s English-language papers, you would think that the only fighting going on in Bangkok is among red shirts and local residents, with virtually no mention of the massive armed military presence which itself resembles an uncontrolled mob in some places.
We were first told that soldiers were firing live ammunitionm but only in the air. When we saw BBC videos of troops firing directly at people, we were told that they were using blanks, When we heard people had died, we were told that it was people shooting people, and that all those soldiers were shooting clouds.
It’s a tragedy to see people dying in the streets of one of Asia’s great capitals in what may well be a misguided fight for democracy. But it’s an even greater tragedy to see the free press die, as those who style themselves “journalists” rush to become concubines of a feckless government without shame.
Photos of the crisis in Thailand
Tuesday morning 14-04-2009 at 9.00 a.m. I tried to access the thaienews.blogspot from inside Thailand and it was being blocked by the Thai government censors. The warning message in English states that “This URL has been blocked by a Court Order…” which is most likely a lie because their habit is to block first and get a court order later, if ever. Now I am interested to see how many other photo sites are being blocked.
Andrew Walker on SBS radio
They had some days or even weeks warning of that intention and they clearly failed abysmally to deploy sufficient security around the summit.
I wonder whether sufficiency security will be used in future?
Battle at Dindaeng, Bangkok, 13 April 2009
No I was not referring specifically to ANU alumnus, but after reading your post perhaps it is time for you to graduate into the real world? Suriyasai has called for the mobs to back the army and illicit government as agent provocateurs- as if they need such a black force against an unarmed mass demonstration; pathetic. Meanwhile as in October 1976 the army will do the dirty work with the media as one voice lambasting the reds , shoot a few unarmed demonstrators and then…in a couple of days Prem will come out of hiding and save the day reinstating the Democrat Party as illegitimate heirs to the political throne all the time mouthing about democracy… (Now even the CNN shows repetitive pictures of single incidence of anger – and its reportage is atrocious: note how many times do we see the bus collision pic!!) What about the deaths? the bloodletting from “blanks”? Where are transparency, fairness and justice? People have short memories of the direct involvement of Abhisit and his elite military cronies supporting the yellows carrying weapons to heap destruction on the nation.
Montesano on Thailand’s crisis
Seeing a neighboring country like Malaysia produces a competent journalist, has made me realize the level of educational difference between Thailand and Malaysia. I hope as ASEAN further integrates, the Malaysian Insiders could expand their business to Thailand. Besides Prachatai and Matichon, Thailand has no quality newspaper.
I would like to point out Montesano’s good arguments.
1. I think it is accurate to say that the current situation reflects the majority of Thai people across the country is challenging the “network monarchy.” Indeed, it has hindered Thailand’s modernization. If Thailand current sovereign hadn’t play an active role in his government in the past three or four decades, Thailand’s economic base would have joined the rank of Singapore. Instead, Thailand is now broke; the country has minus 4% GDP, two millions unemployed, and jumbo loans from international finance institutions, while the monarch is the world richest with lese majeste impunity.
2. In the realm of polity, the “network monarchy”continues to enforce its “patron-client tied” structure. Instead of reforming, it turns toward applying coercive force, mastermind method, and “network monarchy” intervention to maintain its control in judicial, political, executive, and security branches. As a result, we have a strong bureaucratic state, where the element of market is unable to emerge and grow. And discontent among the governed has spread across the land to every provinces.
It is time for an open and productive discuss whether it is a better path for Thailand to change to presidential system where Thai people can directly elect its leader to the Republic, as a solution to its political turmoil. Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines seem to be successful in their transition to democracy. I think this may be the change Thailand needs.
On the Songkran crisis of 2009
‘Why now’ can be broken up into two questions:
1. Why start/escalate now?
Bangkok Pundit has started a thread on that topic – in addition to the unmentionable, I think it is clear that they did not want Abhisit enhancing his credibility from a successful ASEAN summit, and there is also the upcoming court case concerning a small matter of 73 billion baht!
2. Why not retreat now, let the dust settle, give the powers a chance to initiate genuine political reform, regroup later if necessary?
The answer to that is less clear, but I expect ‘stubborn bloodymindedness’ and ‘aversion to loss of face’ are part of the equation on behalf of the leaders (on both sides), and amongst the followers I expect its hard to come down from a ‘rush of blood’.
Andrew Walker on SBS radio
Some more Marxist-Neoliberal commentary is available here.
On the Songkran crisis of 2009
nganadeeleg –
Why now? I can’t really say. But if they were foolish enough to start this kind of stuff, I wouldn’t expect them to be wise enough to stop it.
I guess the figure they they are in to deep to get out.
The yellow lesson
If I stopped eating and sleeping I would have time, like some of the rest of us…