As far as I can see, the Bangkok Post did not report on that press conference. It merely had one sentence buried in another article on p. 3 a few days later. In an editorial on another issue, they said that Thaksin had “disappeared” and, as a result, TRT “disintegrated.” No word that the party (as well as PPP) was dissolved. Yet another article wanted to make readers believe (right on the front page) that an independent academic from Thammasat University (Surachai Sirikrai) voiced an opinion on the reds. In fact, that guy belongs to the Abhisit government as an advisor to a minister, thus must be treated as delivering the official line, thus should have been referred to as a government advisor.
The examples of negligent reporting and commenting in the Bangkok Post go on an on. I wonder what happened to their professionalism. Below their masthead, they claim, “The newspaper you can trust.” However, the Bangkok Post has seriously compromised this by an increasingly unprofessional approach, which is a great pity.
Can you write the word Taro in Thai? I don’t think it’s a Thai word.
When I see the word, I think of the Japanese surprise attack. Tora!…Tora!…Tora!… bombarding Pearl Harbor.
The Thai Government Public Relations Department should take fact and being truthful seriously. The United States had given Thailand this rain making technology as part of the counter-insurgency program during the height of the Cold War confrontation.
During the Cold War era, the dry up Northeast region, was the strong hold of the communists. In order to win back the hearts and minds of those rural population from the communists, the US recommended socio-economic and political measures. The failure in South Vietnam had given a lesson that military force alone was not working. The policy to increase the farmers’ income, hence, was initiated as the method to win them over from the communists. As farmers could grow rice twice a year, the poverty problem would diminished. Consequently, those farmers would stop supporting the communists. In order to grow rice twice a year, an artificial rain was needed. The US then provided that rain making technology accompanied with the C130 airplanes as the counter-insurgency program assistance. However, the monarchy claimed it as the royal rain. And because of lese majeste law, the truth cannot be spoken.
Thanks for the comment Sidh. In my opinion the problem with Peu Thai is that it is so explicitly pro-taksin, and I don’t trust this party either. I agree that the extremists ( Sondhi and the vehemently pro-taksin group) are doing more harm than good. Unlike u, however, I appreciate the recent proposal by NM and academics abt LM reformation. I believe they mean well for Thailand, although most of them are foreigners.I also applaud earlier attempt by Aj Nidhi Eowsriwong and others from Mid-night uni who call for similar adjustment of LM law.
Yes, ultimately it’s Thais who can initiate change in this this country but i guess what is needed is to encourage the people to be as well-informed and as well-educated as possible.Viewed in this light, recent crackdown (by the government?) on websites like Prachathai is unacceptable because they are obtructing the public’s right to information and knowledge. While people may not agree with everything posted on Prachathai, this site is highly valuable as an alternative souce of info (as opposed to mainstream media in Thailand). I think the Thai public also needs to have some knowledge of postcolonialism because it will help them to challenge existing norms, official and popular discourses and offer better alternatives to them (e.g. popular notion of nationalism, national identity, the concepts of freedom , democracy, civic virtues etc.). Prachathai is actually promoting this kind of knowledge.
I reckon the hope lies in the general populace who can question and challenge power relations and status quo, not the politicians from both the gov or the opposition sides.
“why can’t you wait until the situation has got better.”
You still don’t understand. The current upswell of anti-monarchy feeling is (at least in part) an *effect* of the lese majeste laws.
As long as the LM laws are applied in an arbitrary and draconian manner, then the situation is not going to get better. You’re assuming that the LM laws protect the monarchy from a republican sentiment. I think it’s fairly clear that the LM laws are helping to create that very sentiment.
“In reality there is neither freedom of speech nor academic freedom nor democracy in Thailand today” . . .
. . . seems to me to be obviously true. That there is no freedom of speech is quite amply demonstrated by the existence of the lese majeste laws. That there is no academic freedom is immediately apparent to anyone who has worked in a Thai university (as I do; Tenure? Ahaha.). And that there is no democracy I would have thought would be clear to anyone, given the fact that the present government only came to power through a judicial coup after losing successive elections.
Seeing this book, I realize why scholarship in Thai studies is going no where. Its approach reflects the lack of intellectual content. Even people in the profession of journalism can certainly provide a better and accurate report of the story. It is insulting for anyone to believe that Abhisit became a PM because he was a good student and athletic and followed his dream. Seven times, Abhisit competed in the election and the Democrat party performed poorly to the point that they were discussing about replacing him with a new leader. Thai people see through Abhisit, they neither trust him nor believe he has any credible ability.
I suggest professors in Thai studies should begin the teaching with the book review assignment by asking why the book was written and its major shortcomings.
We are closer and become more interdependent as the process of globalization develops across the world. As we interacting with the world and with other people we are constantly acquiring beliefs from our observations, readings, and discussions with others.
Thailand, a country under the United States sphere of influence during the Cold War, began its industrialization process in 1957. While Singapore, South Korea, China Taipei, Indonesia, Malaysia have forged forward in both its economic and political development. Thailand begins its economic decline, social disparity and political turmoils. Instead of following the famous East Asia “pathway from periphery”, Thailand adopts Latin America model where the Thai monarchy and the military suppress the country’s democratic transition process. Economic growth and political progress have to go hand in hand in order to bring about a real development. We can no longer continue with a leader that majority of Thai people did not choose.
Thank you Giles Ji Ungpakorn and Lee Jones for speaking out. Today Mr. Satit Wongnongtoi, deputy Prime Minister and a key leader of the Democrat Party has announced that Thailand will undertake a political reform. In this regard, I personally would like to thank Giles’ cousin and Giles’ uncle in the Democrat Party for making this possible. Thank you for averting the arms struggle option.
jonfernquest said: “This is false there have been continual articles about this issue in even the most conservative media.”
And the Bangkok Post, jonfernquest?
Was it simply an oversight that it didn’t have a story on Ji’s first substantive press conference, on Jan. 13, before he was supposed to answer a police summons? (A Post reporter was there.)
What about the March 4 video press conference by the scholars at the FCCT? I know the Post’s editors were aware of it in advance.
It was reported on Page 1B of the March 5 Nation. I don’t see a matching story in the Post.
Since you have an inside track on doings at the Post, maybe you can enlighten us about its editorial policy on this matter.
I read Noi’s posting above and disagree from beginning to end. But the author (she?) disarms me. Hers is so calm, cool and CLASSIC.
Instead of arguing point by point against her, it is more interesting to think how Thailand has been so successful in molding their citizens to think alike, parrotting alike, and perhaps can sacrifice their lives as loyal ‘subjects’ (not citizens) with relatively low intensity suppression (until the past few years), compared to many other countries. I wonder what Gramsci would have said. Now I am convinced that Thailand is truly remarkable in this regard.
Firstly, johnfernquest if you were not so concerned with assassinating the Oxford brand, maybe you would have noticed that Lee Jones is not specifically a scholar of Thailand, but the international relations of the Asia Pacific, and it seems the recent history of interventions. Not to speak for Lee Jones, but IR and area studies are different fields. Do you expect people to write letters with footnotes and not expect them to be ignored as whining harpies?
Secondly, Lee Jones, as surely you are aware, just because you have evidence of supporting academic freedom previously doesn’t mean you have to support it all of the time. Especially when a country, visited often and loved, is at the mercy of an Oxford man who hammered his way into power following “a period of naked manipulation of Thai politics by cynical political elites.” It’s not as though pleading innocent here is going to alter the ambiguous reputations Oxbridge institutions have with power. Especially when you’ve written to a “Sir”. You’re freely able as an academic to object to another academic talking. Surely you’ve told someone to shut up before? I don’t see how it’s worth defending yourself – and that you do speaks more about how posed things have become. Tea anyone?
Sidh #12: Once again you are nit-picking and clutching at straws, and I would go so far as to say that your statement that Lee’s “…in reality there is neither freedom of speech nor academic freedom nor democracy in Thailand today…” is “totally inaccurate,” is itself totally inaccurate. There is ample evidence to support it. You’ve obviously been living in Australia for too long.
I would be the last to suggest that Oz is a perfect democracy (no such society exists), but here is an exercise for you: ask yourself what would happen in Oz if the military were to beat up a boatload of refugees who had travelled in a condition of near-starvation for weeks, and then take them out to sea & cut them adrift; if a court were to dismiss for “lack of evidence” a murder charge against a policeman who had (in front of witnesses willing to testify) shot a Canadian tourist several times, hitting a deadly mark precisely each time, and shot his female companion through the stomache (it was wrongly believed by people in the area, including, we may assume because he knew her, the cop, that she was pregnant), although the leading forensic scientist in the country publicly declared that the statement by the policeman that his gun had gone off accidentally was obviously wrong; if a government were to turn a blind eye to millions of dollars worth of damage inflicted by demonstrators who occupied the house of parliament and the principal international airport; if the country’s police regularly & openly set up road blocks in the capital to extract bribes from every motorist; …I could go on for pages like this, but I’d be wasting space and boring the bulk of readers who know Thailand, because they all know all of this and much more.
The answer is that things like this, everyday bare-faced and arrogant denials of democratic principles, couldn’t possibly happen in Oz. Why? Because it is bumbling on as a functioning democracy where the courts, the media and the voters are vigilant & vocal, & are protected to a very large extent by the constitution & the rule of law, even when they get the facts wrong, or are considered ‘tasteless,’ or when the majority of the population disagrees with the opinions they express.
So I don’t think it is unreasonable for Lee Jones to have said what he did. I wish more people would say things like these, shout them from the rooftops. For strict accuracy, and to satisfy the Sidh’s of this world, maybe the message should be, ” There is unlimited freedom of speech in areas which do not give offence to the elite classes, there is great academic freedom in areas where the pursuit of truth is not an issue, and democracy is freely available in strictly limited amounts to all who can afford to pay for it, provided they are not thought by the elite to be stupid.”
“exaggerated for emphasis”, “overstatement for mere rhetorical effect” – I’ll take that from you combined with “my Thai is too poor” and “My knowledge of Thailand is indeed very modest compared to many others”… although I hope SirMichael has not swallowed the contents of the letter statement whole…
However, I am as saddened by what goes around in private… It probably more accurately reflect what people really think. It saddens me deeply that people, who may not even know where Thailand is on the world map (not you in this case, but people you talk to, students you teach), may misunderstand that the country’s political development is on par with Myanmar, NKorea, Zimbabwe. Overstatements for mere rhetorical effects, like gossip, can be as disastrous for a country and people you profess to “love”…
No worries Joy.
PMAbhisit has only been in power for 2.5 months. It normally takes much longer to settle in the position. However, he is literally thrown in the deep end with the worst global recession since the Great Depression and PMThaksin/Peu Thai/Reds activities. I can only wish him well there and it would be a considerable achievement in itself if his government lasts more than a year (on the other hand, if the opposition don’t get its act together, they can be in for much longer).
On political reform, I think it was right to let a ‘neutral’ organization like King Prajadhipok Institution lead and mediate it with broader public participation (it is hoped). And the LM law should also be addressed at this venue. It should be thrown to the Thai public as it must be them who decide and not from anyone or any pressure imposed/applied from abroad.
In fact, the international scholars movement could easily backfire and even the smaller not-so-royalist portion of the Thai population can be quite emotionally nationalistic. Look how much media coverage this has generated in Thailand – a drop in the ocean. For one, it is the least of the vast majority of Thai’s worries. And if it happens to be unpopular too, it is the least of the politician’s worries too…
Peu Thai seem to disagree with having King Prajadhipok Institute host reforms – but, personally, I don’t trust politicians, whether Democrats or Peu Thai to lead the process. Some other well-meaning reformer would have to include LM as part of a broader political reform process…
“Let us not differentiate between whether the letter is meant for public consumption or specifically for SirMichael”
Well, come now. I do distinguish between what I say privately and publicly, and so does everyone else. Jonfernquest believes I should have added footnotes to my letter “like my teacher taught me” since I am “not in grade school” any more. My academic work is amply footnoted, but a quick emailed fired off in five minutes to make a point to a colleague within my own university is not going to exhibit the same level of rigour. As I say, had I known that this letter would be “leaked” I would have spent a lot more time injecting nuance, evidence and references into it. I don’t mind admitting that the email is somewhat exaggerated for emphasis, but I would stand by the basic message about how the Abhisit government came to power. I don’t know how anyone who has been watching events in Thailand closely over the last few years could disagree, except from a partisan perspective. To say there is “no democracy” etc is clearly an overstatement for mere rhetorical effect. It is not an academic statement – because it was not made in an academic context. It was a personal, private email that has now been splashed across the internet without my permission.
I understand that the letter is now being discussed across various Thai websites. Unfortunately my Thai is too poor to allow me to follow these discussions, but I understand that some people are saying things similar to Jonfernquest, i.e., he doesn’t know anything about Thailand, he is a meddling farang, he is running down Thailand, etc. People are entitled to their views. That doesn’t necessarily mean they are right. I actually love Thailand a great deal. It is probably my favourite country and I try to visit regularly. I was there last year as the PPP government was coming to power, conducting research. My knowledge of Thailand is indeed very modest compared to many others, but I am not quite as ignorant as some would have it. Incidentally, I have received a large number of emails in response to the letter being circulated on various sites. Only one has expressed criticism, and that in the very mildest of terms.
Finally, I am glad to have been given the benefit of the doubt over not wishing to have Abhisit disinvited. I do have form on this, having defended academic freedom, criticised “no platform” positions and attacked attempts to stifle protest movements in the past — all in the UK (which has assaulted civil and democratic rights in recent years in line with many Western governments). This has involved defending the freedom of individuals and groups with which I profoundly disagree.
Sounds like Vietnam is becoming ‘Thai-ified’. For ‘Generation Y’, it seems that the most ‘relevant’ international space for conversation is the Internet. Why be a ‘tourist’ when you can talk to someone from that country/culture in a more conversational manner through meeting them in an online chat room or social networking site?
“no matter how the govt and royalist media try to ignore it ”
This is false there have been continual articles about this issue in even the most conservative media. For a full professor of Thai Studies at a prestigious US university this is really sloppy work. What exactly constitutes “royalist media” ? Both sides of the political dispute have been invoking LM.
It is often hard to know exactly what the professor is talking about without citations. When I read this essay, I think, o he may be talking about this or that, or, I’m not really sure…..which makes it pretty useless for swaying opinion
IMHO The likelihood of LM reform before all the other issues on the table are cleared up is very unlikely. To confound them all into an indiscernible potpouri mish-mash of connected political issues as this blog typically does, is sure to make reform even less likely.
I’m not surprised nor disappointed by the comment of PM Abhisit on the “letter” . Considering his outstanding educational background, the chance of misread by this Oxford graduated PM is nil. This led me to the conclusion of, the immense power that pulls every strings on the puppet so tight, leave the puppet no choice, but repeating the lines of “republics phobia” senselessly.
Noi:
I and everybody I know respect him due to the things that he did for the country. Please don’t blame him or our monarchy system if you don’t really know.
I and with me everybody else I know is 100% aware, that the Thais love their king like a father, almost like a god figure. I do not blame HIM for anything. I criticize the people who are enforcing LM for their own political interests, that has nothing to do with the kings wishes and position anymore. (see comment from Abhisit regarding the need of changing the law and his majestys birthday speech in december 2005). As a lot of people have said before, it is not about the king, his role in the society or his position. It is about the abuse of power, freedom of expression, oppression of opinions, the need for criticism and discourse.
Noi:
For me, I automatically respect our beloved king and I am willig to protect him from all accusation. why??? The reason is that I am Thai.
For me, I automatically become a fascist, want to start a war and am willing to kill thousands of people to gain power and money. Why?? The reason is that I am German….
Sorry, a bit drastic, but basically that’s what it’s all about. When a person has a certain ethnicity, culture or nationality, that does not make him a fascist, royalist, democrat, socialist or whatever by birth. This is a process of education, socialization, cultural heritage.
As a German, I don’t want to become a fascist anymore, that lesson we learned 60 years ago. But at that time. I probably would have.
Noi:
The government did not block such websites or punish people who blame him or monarchy system because no one can touch. But, that people or website are going to defamous a person who is exceptionally respected in the country.
By not standing in the movie theater, by writing a book that contents 2 paragraphs with fictional comments about the royal family, by writing articles or asking students questions?
All these are harmless acts, who is being defamed by this? Open discourse is not possible if people fear that every word they say about history, the role of the monarchy and therefore society and development in Thailand itself brings them to prison.
AGAIN: it is not about harming the king or his institutions, it is about the abuse of this law. It is about freedom of speech, about discourse and tolerance.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thongchai Winichakul’s update on lese majeste reform
As far as I can see, the Bangkok Post did not report on that press conference. It merely had one sentence buried in another article on p. 3 a few days later. In an editorial on another issue, they said that Thaksin had “disappeared” and, as a result, TRT “disintegrated.” No word that the party (as well as PPP) was dissolved. Yet another article wanted to make readers believe (right on the front page) that an independent academic from Thammasat University (Surachai Sirikrai) voiced an opinion on the reds. In fact, that guy belongs to the Abhisit government as an advisor to a minister, thus must be treated as delivering the official line, thus should have been referred to as a government advisor.
The examples of negligent reporting and commenting in the Bangkok Post go on an on. I wonder what happened to their professionalism. Below their masthead, they claim, “The newspaper you can trust.” However, the Bangkok Post has seriously compromised this by an increasingly unprofessional approach, which is a great pity.
“Don’t study at the ANU”
Can you write the word Taro in Thai? I don’t think it’s a Thai word.
When I see the word, I think of the Japanese surprise attack. Tora!…Tora!…Tora!… bombarding Pearl Harbor.
“Super Sandwich” for northern Thailand
The Thai Government Public Relations Department should take fact and being truthful seriously. The United States had given Thailand this rain making technology as part of the counter-insurgency program during the height of the Cold War confrontation.
During the Cold War era, the dry up Northeast region, was the strong hold of the communists. In order to win back the hearts and minds of those rural population from the communists, the US recommended socio-economic and political measures. The failure in South Vietnam had given a lesson that military force alone was not working. The policy to increase the farmers’ income, hence, was initiated as the method to win them over from the communists. As farmers could grow rice twice a year, the poverty problem would diminished. Consequently, those farmers would stop supporting the communists. In order to grow rice twice a year, an artificial rain was needed. The US then provided that rain making technology accompanied with the C130 airplanes as the counter-insurgency program assistance. However, the monarchy claimed it as the royal rain. And because of lese majeste law, the truth cannot be spoken.
New Mandala on lese majeste
Thanks for the comment Sidh. In my opinion the problem with Peu Thai is that it is so explicitly pro-taksin, and I don’t trust this party either. I agree that the extremists ( Sondhi and the vehemently pro-taksin group) are doing more harm than good. Unlike u, however, I appreciate the recent proposal by NM and academics abt LM reformation. I believe they mean well for Thailand, although most of them are foreigners.I also applaud earlier attempt by Aj Nidhi Eowsriwong and others from Mid-night uni who call for similar adjustment of LM law.
Yes, ultimately it’s Thais who can initiate change in this this country but i guess what is needed is to encourage the people to be as well-informed and as well-educated as possible.Viewed in this light, recent crackdown (by the government?) on websites like Prachathai is unacceptable because they are obtructing the public’s right to information and knowledge. While people may not agree with everything posted on Prachathai, this site is highly valuable as an alternative souce of info (as opposed to mainstream media in Thailand). I think the Thai public also needs to have some knowledge of postcolonialism because it will help them to challenge existing norms, official and popular discourses and offer better alternatives to them (e.g. popular notion of nationalism, national identity, the concepts of freedom , democracy, civic virtues etc.). Prachathai is actually promoting this kind of knowledge.
I reckon the hope lies in the general populace who can question and challenge power relations and status quo, not the politicians from both the gov or the opposition sides.
“Don’t study at the ANU”
“why can’t you wait until the situation has got better.”
You still don’t understand. The current upswell of anti-monarchy feeling is (at least in part) an *effect* of the lese majeste laws.
As long as the LM laws are applied in an arbitrary and draconian manner, then the situation is not going to get better. You’re assuming that the LM laws protect the monarchy from a republican sentiment. I think it’s fairly clear that the LM laws are helping to create that very sentiment.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
@Sidh
“In reality there is neither freedom of speech nor academic freedom nor democracy in Thailand today” . . .
. . . seems to me to be obviously true. That there is no freedom of speech is quite amply demonstrated by the existence of the lese majeste laws. That there is no academic freedom is immediately apparent to anyone who has worked in a Thai university (as I do; Tenure? Ahaha.). And that there is no democracy I would have thought would be clear to anyone, given the fact that the present government only came to power through a judicial coup after losing successive elections.
Heath Dollar on Harry’s literary ambition
To rofen: Mr. Dollar was only made aware of the case after receiving an e-mailed article from a colleague after the fact.
Time for an Oxford Scholar
Seeing this book, I realize why scholarship in Thai studies is going no where. Its approach reflects the lack of intellectual content. Even people in the profession of journalism can certainly provide a better and accurate report of the story. It is insulting for anyone to believe that Abhisit became a PM because he was a good student and athletic and followed his dream. Seven times, Abhisit competed in the election and the Democrat party performed poorly to the point that they were discussing about replacing him with a new leader. Thai people see through Abhisit, they neither trust him nor believe he has any credible ability.
I suggest professors in Thai studies should begin the teaching with the book review assignment by asking why the book was written and its major shortcomings.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
We are closer and become more interdependent as the process of globalization develops across the world. As we interacting with the world and with other people we are constantly acquiring beliefs from our observations, readings, and discussions with others.
Thailand, a country under the United States sphere of influence during the Cold War, began its industrialization process in 1957. While Singapore, South Korea, China Taipei, Indonesia, Malaysia have forged forward in both its economic and political development. Thailand begins its economic decline, social disparity and political turmoils. Instead of following the famous East Asia “pathway from periphery”, Thailand adopts Latin America model where the Thai monarchy and the military suppress the country’s democratic transition process. Economic growth and political progress have to go hand in hand in order to bring about a real development. We can no longer continue with a leader that majority of Thai people did not choose.
Thank you Giles Ji Ungpakorn and Lee Jones for speaking out. Today Mr. Satit Wongnongtoi, deputy Prime Minister and a key leader of the Democrat Party has announced that Thailand will undertake a political reform. In this regard, I personally would like to thank Giles’ cousin and Giles’ uncle in the Democrat Party for making this possible. Thank you for averting the arms struggle option.
Thongchai Winichakul’s update on lese majeste reform
jonfernquest said: “This is false there have been continual articles about this issue in even the most conservative media.”
And the Bangkok Post, jonfernquest?
Was it simply an oversight that it didn’t have a story on Ji’s first substantive press conference, on Jan. 13, before he was supposed to answer a police summons? (A Post reporter was there.)
What about the March 4 video press conference by the scholars at the FCCT? I know the Post’s editors were aware of it in advance.
It was reported on Page 1B of the March 5 Nation. I don’t see a matching story in the Post.
Since you have an inside track on doings at the Post, maybe you can enlighten us about its editorial policy on this matter.
International scholars call for reform of Thailand’s lese majeste law
I read Noi’s posting above and disagree from beginning to end. But the author (she?) disarms me. Hers is so calm, cool and CLASSIC.
Instead of arguing point by point against her, it is more interesting to think how Thailand has been so successful in molding their citizens to think alike, parrotting alike, and perhaps can sacrifice their lives as loyal ‘subjects’ (not citizens) with relatively low intensity suppression (until the past few years), compared to many other countries. I wonder what Gramsci would have said. Now I am convinced that Thailand is truly remarkable in this regard.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
Firstly, johnfernquest if you were not so concerned with assassinating the Oxford brand, maybe you would have noticed that Lee Jones is not specifically a scholar of Thailand, but the international relations of the Asia Pacific, and it seems the recent history of interventions. Not to speak for Lee Jones, but IR and area studies are different fields. Do you expect people to write letters with footnotes and not expect them to be ignored as whining harpies?
Secondly, Lee Jones, as surely you are aware, just because you have evidence of supporting academic freedom previously doesn’t mean you have to support it all of the time. Especially when a country, visited often and loved, is at the mercy of an Oxford man who hammered his way into power following “a period of naked manipulation of Thai politics by cynical political elites.” It’s not as though pleading innocent here is going to alter the ambiguous reputations Oxbridge institutions have with power. Especially when you’ve written to a “Sir”. You’re freely able as an academic to object to another academic talking. Surely you’ve told someone to shut up before? I don’t see how it’s worth defending yourself – and that you do speaks more about how posed things have become. Tea anyone?
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
Sidh #12: Once again you are nit-picking and clutching at straws, and I would go so far as to say that your statement that Lee’s “…in reality there is neither freedom of speech nor academic freedom nor democracy in Thailand today…” is “totally inaccurate,” is itself totally inaccurate. There is ample evidence to support it. You’ve obviously been living in Australia for too long.
I would be the last to suggest that Oz is a perfect democracy (no such society exists), but here is an exercise for you: ask yourself what would happen in Oz if the military were to beat up a boatload of refugees who had travelled in a condition of near-starvation for weeks, and then take them out to sea & cut them adrift; if a court were to dismiss for “lack of evidence” a murder charge against a policeman who had (in front of witnesses willing to testify) shot a Canadian tourist several times, hitting a deadly mark precisely each time, and shot his female companion through the stomache (it was wrongly believed by people in the area, including, we may assume because he knew her, the cop, that she was pregnant), although the leading forensic scientist in the country publicly declared that the statement by the policeman that his gun had gone off accidentally was obviously wrong; if a government were to turn a blind eye to millions of dollars worth of damage inflicted by demonstrators who occupied the house of parliament and the principal international airport; if the country’s police regularly & openly set up road blocks in the capital to extract bribes from every motorist; …I could go on for pages like this, but I’d be wasting space and boring the bulk of readers who know Thailand, because they all know all of this and much more.
The answer is that things like this, everyday bare-faced and arrogant denials of democratic principles, couldn’t possibly happen in Oz. Why? Because it is bumbling on as a functioning democracy where the courts, the media and the voters are vigilant & vocal, & are protected to a very large extent by the constitution & the rule of law, even when they get the facts wrong, or are considered ‘tasteless,’ or when the majority of the population disagrees with the opinions they express.
So I don’t think it is unreasonable for Lee Jones to have said what he did. I wish more people would say things like these, shout them from the rooftops. For strict accuracy, and to satisfy the Sidh’s of this world, maybe the message should be, ” There is unlimited freedom of speech in areas which do not give offence to the elite classes, there is great academic freedom in areas where the pursuit of truth is not an issue, and democracy is freely available in strictly limited amounts to all who can afford to pay for it, provided they are not thought by the elite to be stupid.”
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
“exaggerated for emphasis”, “overstatement for mere rhetorical effect” – I’ll take that from you combined with “my Thai is too poor” and “My knowledge of Thailand is indeed very modest compared to many others”… although I hope SirMichael has not swallowed the contents of the letter statement whole…
However, I am as saddened by what goes around in private… It probably more accurately reflect what people really think. It saddens me deeply that people, who may not even know where Thailand is on the world map (not you in this case, but people you talk to, students you teach), may misunderstand that the country’s political development is on par with Myanmar, NKorea, Zimbabwe. Overstatements for mere rhetorical effects, like gossip, can be as disastrous for a country and people you profess to “love”…
New Mandala on lese majeste
No worries Joy.
PMAbhisit has only been in power for 2.5 months. It normally takes much longer to settle in the position. However, he is literally thrown in the deep end with the worst global recession since the Great Depression and PMThaksin/Peu Thai/Reds activities. I can only wish him well there and it would be a considerable achievement in itself if his government lasts more than a year (on the other hand, if the opposition don’t get its act together, they can be in for much longer).
On political reform, I think it was right to let a ‘neutral’ organization like King Prajadhipok Institution lead and mediate it with broader public participation (it is hoped). And the LM law should also be addressed at this venue. It should be thrown to the Thai public as it must be them who decide and not from anyone or any pressure imposed/applied from abroad.
In fact, the international scholars movement could easily backfire and even the smaller not-so-royalist portion of the Thai population can be quite emotionally nationalistic. Look how much media coverage this has generated in Thailand – a drop in the ocean. For one, it is the least of the vast majority of Thai’s worries. And if it happens to be unpopular too, it is the least of the politician’s worries too…
Peu Thai seem to disagree with having King Prajadhipok Institute host reforms – but, personally, I don’t trust politicians, whether Democrats or Peu Thai to lead the process. Some other well-meaning reformer would have to include LM as part of a broader political reform process…
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
“Let us not differentiate between whether the letter is meant for public consumption or specifically for SirMichael”
Well, come now. I do distinguish between what I say privately and publicly, and so does everyone else. Jonfernquest believes I should have added footnotes to my letter “like my teacher taught me” since I am “not in grade school” any more. My academic work is amply footnoted, but a quick emailed fired off in five minutes to make a point to a colleague within my own university is not going to exhibit the same level of rigour. As I say, had I known that this letter would be “leaked” I would have spent a lot more time injecting nuance, evidence and references into it. I don’t mind admitting that the email is somewhat exaggerated for emphasis, but I would stand by the basic message about how the Abhisit government came to power. I don’t know how anyone who has been watching events in Thailand closely over the last few years could disagree, except from a partisan perspective. To say there is “no democracy” etc is clearly an overstatement for mere rhetorical effect. It is not an academic statement – because it was not made in an academic context. It was a personal, private email that has now been splashed across the internet without my permission.
I understand that the letter is now being discussed across various Thai websites. Unfortunately my Thai is too poor to allow me to follow these discussions, but I understand that some people are saying things similar to Jonfernquest, i.e., he doesn’t know anything about Thailand, he is a meddling farang, he is running down Thailand, etc. People are entitled to their views. That doesn’t necessarily mean they are right. I actually love Thailand a great deal. It is probably my favourite country and I try to visit regularly. I was there last year as the PPP government was coming to power, conducting research. My knowledge of Thailand is indeed very modest compared to many others, but I am not quite as ignorant as some would have it. Incidentally, I have received a large number of emails in response to the letter being circulated on various sites. Only one has expressed criticism, and that in the very mildest of terms.
Finally, I am glad to have been given the benefit of the doubt over not wishing to have Abhisit disinvited. I do have form on this, having defended academic freedom, criticised “no platform” positions and attacked attempts to stifle protest movements in the past — all in the UK (which has assaulted civil and democratic rights in recent years in line with many Western governments). This has involved defending the freedom of individuals and groups with which I profoundly disagree.
Talk
Sounds like Vietnam is becoming ‘Thai-ified’. For ‘Generation Y’, it seems that the most ‘relevant’ international space for conversation is the Internet. Why be a ‘tourist’ when you can talk to someone from that country/culture in a more conversational manner through meeting them in an online chat room or social networking site?
Thongchai Winichakul’s update on lese majeste reform
“no matter how the govt and royalist media try to ignore it ”
This is false there have been continual articles about this issue in even the most conservative media. For a full professor of Thai Studies at a prestigious US university this is really sloppy work. What exactly constitutes “royalist media” ? Both sides of the political dispute have been invoking LM.
It is often hard to know exactly what the professor is talking about without citations. When I read this essay, I think, o he may be talking about this or that, or, I’m not really sure…..which makes it pretty useless for swaying opinion
IMHO The likelihood of LM reform before all the other issues on the table are cleared up is very unlikely. To confound them all into an indiscernible potpouri mish-mash of connected political issues as this blog typically does, is sure to make reform even less likely.
Thongchai Winichakul’s update on lese majeste reform
I’m not surprised nor disappointed by the comment of PM Abhisit on the “letter” . Considering his outstanding educational background, the chance of misread by this Oxford graduated PM is nil. This led me to the conclusion of, the immense power that pulls every strings on the puppet so tight, leave the puppet no choice, but repeating the lines of “republics phobia” senselessly.
International scholars call for reform of Thailand’s lese majeste law
Noi:
I and everybody I know respect him due to the things that he did for the country. Please don’t blame him or our monarchy system if you don’t really know.
I and with me everybody else I know is 100% aware, that the Thais love their king like a father, almost like a god figure. I do not blame HIM for anything. I criticize the people who are enforcing LM for their own political interests, that has nothing to do with the kings wishes and position anymore. (see comment from Abhisit regarding the need of changing the law and his majestys birthday speech in december 2005). As a lot of people have said before, it is not about the king, his role in the society or his position. It is about the abuse of power, freedom of expression, oppression of opinions, the need for criticism and discourse.
Noi:
For me, I automatically respect our beloved king and I am willig to protect him from all accusation. why??? The reason is that I am Thai.
For me, I automatically become a fascist, want to start a war and am willing to kill thousands of people to gain power and money. Why?? The reason is that I am German….
Sorry, a bit drastic, but basically that’s what it’s all about. When a person has a certain ethnicity, culture or nationality, that does not make him a fascist, royalist, democrat, socialist or whatever by birth. This is a process of education, socialization, cultural heritage.
As a German, I don’t want to become a fascist anymore, that lesson we learned 60 years ago. But at that time. I probably would have.
Noi:
The government did not block such websites or punish people who blame him or monarchy system because no one can touch. But, that people or website are going to defamous a person who is exceptionally respected in the country.
By not standing in the movie theater, by writing a book that contents 2 paragraphs with fictional comments about the royal family, by writing articles or asking students questions?
All these are harmless acts, who is being defamed by this? Open discourse is not possible if people fear that every word they say about history, the role of the monarchy and therefore society and development in Thailand itself brings them to prison.
AGAIN: it is not about harming the king or his institutions, it is about the abuse of this law. It is about freedom of speech, about discourse and tolerance.