Majority of Thai people demand change. Professor Giles simply points it out in open public. The continuity of political oppressive with lese majeste law will only increase and deepen tension.
I sincerely hope Professor Giles’ principles be taken seriously. Majority of Thai people is serious about change. I prefer to see a peaceful transition to the Republic of Siam, otherwise armed conflicts like in the South will spread across the country.
The military should not try to save Sanan Kachornprasart and Abhisit Vejjajiva at the expense of the majority of Thai people. Abhisit is illegitimate. The military should take action to correct this mistake. The country has come to far to accept illegitimate Abhisit.
The awareness of Thai society has developed beyond PM Thaksin. The military should allow the civil society to grow and mature, it is a healthy social and political development. In all seriousness, the military should recruit Professor Giles Ungpakorn as an advisor.
Secondly, in Theravadan Buddhism “taking refuge” in the “tripple gem” is not to be mixed up with “savior” figures. They come to simbolize wisdom, truth, and virtue – qualities to be developed by the lay people on their individual path to liberation.
As I noted before, I recognize there is a big difference between Theravada and Mahayana soteriology. Nevertheless, wouldn’t you agree that someone or something that shows you the way to liberation is a “savior”? For me, as a Buddhist, someone doesn’t need to have “died for my sins” to be considered my savior; a supremely Awakened being, such as the Buddha, whose teachings show me the path to spiritual freedom and peace is a savior to me.
Of course, this aspect of salvation is emphaized a great deal more in the Mahayana schools, such as the Pure Land school. However, it would be incorrect to say that saddha in the Triple Gem has no place in Theravadan thought. One merely needs to skim the Mahavagga or other Tripitaka texts to see this is true.
The advertising is interesting, with the Samaggi Samagom claiming to be a non-political organisation, restricting press access and claiming the right to total control of the venue, presumably to be able to oust those who might protest something? They also claim that this talk is purely academic. That is a term that is hardly descriptive of the topic. Tej gave this talk somewhere else recently. Was it in Singapore? I recall reading about it and notes from his talk. It was just the usual propaganda and certainly not academic.
Fred Nerk’s prose is not particularly clear in his posts, but at least one point deserves a little more attention.
The historical record that we have is not particularly supportive of the view that “the re-sacralisation of the monarchy becomes a blindingly obvious thing to do.” That may seem obvious in hindsight, but it was not back in then. Sarit tied his regime’s legitimacy to the monarchy for reasons other than fighting communism. Kukrit Pramoj was the one who developed the idea of an authoritarian regime that engaged the monarchy as an element of so-called Thai-style government (see, for example, http://www.fringer.org/wp-content/writings/thainess-eng.pdf). This re-employment of the monarchy was for domestic political reasons to do with a fight between royalists and anti-royalists. At the same time, the Americans had a vague perspective that Sarit was leftist – recall that they had been supporting the previous regime as they developed their anti-communist strategy in SE Asia.
In fact, though, it could be argued that it was the Americans who stumbled across this idea of promoting the monarchy as a Cold War ally, after much searching around by anthropologists and others in their pay. It took a good while for them to come to this view. The idea of printing the king’s portrait and having it put up in rural homes was a way to identify loyal peasants and, by implication, the dangerously communist ones as the anti-communist war in Thailand developed – I’m not sure anyone know how many people were killed in this war from about 1965 to the early 1980s?
Of course, the current king, whose political ideas were largely adopted from Sarit was initially far more vehemently anti-communist than his mentor. But as deals for US aid and support were developed, Sarit was on board with the US and his successors, Thanom and Prapass, continued this process of Americanization.
So I’m not sure that the re-sacralization was not blindingly obvious in the late 1950s, when it began, was more a process of domestic political competition between royalists and anti-royalists, and it took a while for it to become a process tied to US Cold War tactics.
I am so grateful for Giles’ intellectual strength, sincere passion and devotion to the development and national security of Siam and beyond. Thai people dare not speak out in public for fear of lese majeste charge. Thailand has a NAZI control system inside and outside the country!
I have a few questions and observation.
1. The Axis academic research has strategic aims. Whereas the Allied academic research intends for public goods such as Giles’ research purpose is to improve the poor and the voiceless. This imbalance has made the Allied in an disadvantage position and vunerable to be attacked. For example, Michael Connors has been researching about Pridi Banomyong, Dr. Puey Ungpakorn and Giles because these people are the Allied strategic elites and the Axis’ intention is to destroy them. However, the Allied does not realize this fact.
2. The Axis sent in the non-state actors right after destroying Giles’s dad in 1976. For example, the Nation newspaper was established after Dr. Puey was in exile. Suthichai Yoon, a South Korean migrated to Thailand has been writing with one objective, destroying the Allied inside Thailand. The NGO and the media in Thailand have been dominated by the Axis. Yet the Allied has no intelligence of this fact.
I look at how Lee Jones’ approach in international relations in comparison to Michael Conners, it is black and white. This is the reason why the Axis can make an offensive move. They have multinational researchers, NGO, and media as their tools for an attack, the Allied only have public goods intention.
Seems like people have read into my brief comment more than was there. My intention was simply to ensure that people hear about what went on in Chiang Mai. The more people who know, the more likely it is that these thugs representing the red shirts will be put back in their place.
The news reports described them as red shirts, and Giles conceded that homophobic elements existed in the movement (as they do amongst the yellow shirts).
In any case, I will expand on my position.
I am essentially a red shirt supporter. I regard the yellow shirts as contemptible. But as gay man I was outraged at the terrorism demonstrated by the mob in Chiang Mai against Thai gay and transgendered people, including youth, in blocking a parade with a strong anti-AIDS theme.
Thailand has essentially no history of anti-gay violence. While the extent of gay acceptance is often exaggerated, the phrase that has been used by at least one scholar is “tolerance not acceptance”. I think that’s fairly accurate. Some of the western-educated elites have absorbed western homophobia. And Thai-Chinese are influenced by Chinese homophobia. The gay stereotypes one sees on TV, for example in soap operas and comedy shows, are often deplorable. Strangely, even many gay Thais regard them as funny.
But basically Thais have a non-confrontational, ‘live and let live’ attitude. And everyone seems to have at least one gay or khatoey in their extended family !
So my support for the red shirts is now in question.
Actually, I am a bit confused about some interpretations of Theravadan Buddhism getting mixed up with Brahministic and Mahanikayan folklore. Firstly, the Pali Canon doesn’t teach anything about racial superiority/inferiority. If there is no place for a “self” and the definition of nibanna (breaking the cylce of samsara) is the liberation from greed, aversion and delusion I wonder how that fits in. Secondly, in Theravadan Buddhism “taking refuge” in the “tripple gem” is not to be mixed up with “savior” figures. They come to simbolize wisdom, truth, and virtue – qualities to be developed by the lay people on their individual path to liberation. Buddhist monks and nuns are not preachers (at least in the Theravadan tradition) but offer “spiritual guidance” to the general Buddhist public as mutual support. For a more detailed explanation please find a lecture on basic aspects of Buddhism by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi at http://www.bodhimonastery.net/bm/about-buddhism/audio/83-the-buddhas-teaching-as-it-is.html
It would certainly seem as if Thai government were protecting the yellowshirts and vilifying the redshirts. Its report on Oct 7 was inconclusive and did not assign yellowshirt blame nor do criminal charges appear to be forthcoming.
The very nature of the redshirts is what I find disturbing. There is no real platform that I can discern and local groups can act as they wish, e.g., breaking up Chiang Mai’s gay pride.
Many Thais who crave real change, including Ajarn Ji, think a mass movement is necessary. I disagree: a mass movement is always reduced to its most reactionary element.
In 1960s US, most persuasive actions were taken by individuals or small groups. Others chose to work on the system from within the political parties and we all know how well that worked out!
Some idealistic and realistic philosophy of change in practice, with nonviolent action at its core, is the only element which can win lasting change.
The incident of the beaten up soldier is still rather obscure. I have heard conflicting accounts, and can’t really comment on them right now before things are more clear.
I would anyhow not overstate this issue. Many police officers were attacked and beaten up by PAD (and especially after the coup by UDD as well). These very common incidents rarely made it into the media.
do you have any comments on whether you regard the PAD (yellow shirts) as a legitimate protest movement?
for example I believe that strong homophobic sentiments have been expressed on stage by the PAD and over astv… but I have not heard of any direct confrontations (like the chiang mai group claiming to be part of the red shirt group).
do you think legitimacy comes from group discipline or some such?
Laklem is a skunk and opportunist of the first order. For him it’s all about power and prestige, not assisting the Karen people.
He snookered church groups in the U.S. to assist him in his dealings, and now he’s actively working with the SPDC.
I was told that he was hiding in Australia, but it appears that he has now returned to Rangoon. Hopefully the Australian government won’t allow him back in.
To Prasit: I doubt if u are well-informed about what is going on and I don’t think u have read any of Giles’s writing. The following quote from yr own post applies to yrself more than others. Your uninformed comment outrages me and I think u have no right to speak for other Thais but yrself. How do u know that other Thais are indifferent about the draconian law and are as complacent as yrself??? Don’t make easy assumption. It will create wrong impression that all Thais are as insular as u!BTW, I’m Thai.
Quote from Prasit: “When people attacks other personally, they don’t have reason to debate.!…”
One of the greatest things about Ajarn Jai’s outspokenness is that he can’t be dismissed as a Thaksin flunky, because he was always a Thaksin critic. One of the PAD/The Nation’s tactics has been to accuse anybody who disagrees with their positions as being a paid prostitute of Thaksin and his empire–even The Economist is in Thaksin’s back pocket!
Unfortunately, I think this makes life more difficult for Jai, ironically enough. The worst thing in the world for the fascist yellows and the Democrats is to have independent voices opposing them that aren’t linked to Thaksin, which will only make their propaganda machine much more vehement and their fascist tactics more violent and nasty against anybody who dares to challenge them.
One has to ponder what will happen in the next two years. Thailand looks like it is facing an economic and political crisis (as well as a succession crisis) not seen since the 1930s. People seem to forget that it was really the Great Depression that brought down the Absolute Monarchy. Also, the same ideological and proxy political wars are still being fought. I know I will get flack for this, because I don’t want to equate Thaksin with Pridi, but a lot of the charges that are being leveled at Thaksin were leveled at Pridi, everything from lese majeste and republicanism to redistribution of wealth from the aristocrats to the poor and anti-democratic policies against the opposition.
Buddhism doesn’t provide any kind of ’saviour figure’
Huh? That’s news to me. Out of the major religions of the world, I would argue that Buddhism is the one most focused on salvation (i.e. liberation from samsara), and that the Buddha and his teachings (the Dharma) provide a symbol and focus for salvation. In Buddhist theology, this concept is refered to as “taking refuge in the Triple Gem (sarana gamana).”
Now of course, there is a huge difference between the soteriology and buddhology of Theravada and Mahayana schools; nevertheless, both clearly view salvation, through the attainment of Nirvana, as the primary focus, and the Triple Gem as a “savior figure” appears in the earliest credos of the Buddhist faith. Indeed, taking refuge in anything else, including a thammaraj would be seen as “unskillful”.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Red Shirt protest at Government House
Majority of Thai people demand change. Professor Giles simply points it out in open public. The continuity of political oppressive with lese majeste law will only increase and deepen tension.
I sincerely hope Professor Giles’ principles be taken seriously. Majority of Thai people is serious about change. I prefer to see a peaceful transition to the Republic of Siam, otherwise armed conflicts like in the South will spread across the country.
The military should not try to save Sanan Kachornprasart and Abhisit Vejjajiva at the expense of the majority of Thai people. Abhisit is illegitimate. The military should take action to correct this mistake. The country has come to far to accept illegitimate Abhisit.
The awareness of Thai society has developed beyond PM Thaksin. The military should allow the civil society to grow and mature, it is a healthy social and political development. In all seriousness, the military should recruit Professor Giles Ungpakorn as an advisor.
Thailand: Love it or leave it
re: Nero Hansen
Secondly, in Theravadan Buddhism “taking refuge” in the “tripple gem” is not to be mixed up with “savior” figures. They come to simbolize wisdom, truth, and virtue – qualities to be developed by the lay people on their individual path to liberation.
As I noted before, I recognize there is a big difference between Theravada and Mahayana soteriology. Nevertheless, wouldn’t you agree that someone or something that shows you the way to liberation is a “savior”? For me, as a Buddhist, someone doesn’t need to have “died for my sins” to be considered my savior; a supremely Awakened being, such as the Buddha, whose teachings show me the path to spiritual freedom and peace is a savior to me.
Of course, this aspect of salvation is emphaized a great deal more in the Mahayana schools, such as the Pure Land school. However, it would be incorrect to say that saddha in the Triple Gem has no place in Theravadan thought. One merely needs to skim the Mahavagga or other Tripitaka texts to see this is true.
Video of Giles Ji Ungpakorn at SOAS
Part I, II, III, IV are all available at YouTube.
Just type soasmediaGiles Ungpakorn.
Tej Bunnag speaking in London
The advertising is interesting, with the Samaggi Samagom claiming to be a non-political organisation, restricting press access and claiming the right to total control of the venue, presumably to be able to oust those who might protest something? They also claim that this talk is purely academic. That is a term that is hardly descriptive of the topic. Tej gave this talk somewhere else recently. Was it in Singapore? I recall reading about it and notes from his talk. It was just the usual propaganda and certainly not academic.
Thailand: Love it or leave it
Fred Nerk’s prose is not particularly clear in his posts, but at least one point deserves a little more attention.
The historical record that we have is not particularly supportive of the view that “the re-sacralisation of the monarchy becomes a blindingly obvious thing to do.” That may seem obvious in hindsight, but it was not back in then. Sarit tied his regime’s legitimacy to the monarchy for reasons other than fighting communism. Kukrit Pramoj was the one who developed the idea of an authoritarian regime that engaged the monarchy as an element of so-called Thai-style government (see, for example, http://www.fringer.org/wp-content/writings/thainess-eng.pdf). This re-employment of the monarchy was for domestic political reasons to do with a fight between royalists and anti-royalists. At the same time, the Americans had a vague perspective that Sarit was leftist – recall that they had been supporting the previous regime as they developed their anti-communist strategy in SE Asia.
In fact, though, it could be argued that it was the Americans who stumbled across this idea of promoting the monarchy as a Cold War ally, after much searching around by anthropologists and others in their pay. It took a good while for them to come to this view. The idea of printing the king’s portrait and having it put up in rural homes was a way to identify loyal peasants and, by implication, the dangerously communist ones as the anti-communist war in Thailand developed – I’m not sure anyone know how many people were killed in this war from about 1965 to the early 1980s?
Of course, the current king, whose political ideas were largely adopted from Sarit was initially far more vehemently anti-communist than his mentor. But as deals for US aid and support were developed, Sarit was on board with the US and his successors, Thanom and Prapass, continued this process of Americanization.
So I’m not sure that the re-sacralization was not blindingly obvious in the late 1950s, when it began, was more a process of domestic political competition between royalists and anti-royalists, and it took a while for it to become a process tied to US Cold War tactics.
Tej Bunnag speaking in London
“open-minded foreigner guests” > Read: Foreigners who are prepared to take Tej’s official propaganda.
Report on “Lèse Majesté in Thailand: The Enemy of Democracy”
I am so grateful for Giles’ intellectual strength, sincere passion and devotion to the development and national security of Siam and beyond. Thai people dare not speak out in public for fear of lese majeste charge. Thailand has a NAZI control system inside and outside the country!
I have a few questions and observation.
1. The Axis academic research has strategic aims. Whereas the Allied academic research intends for public goods such as Giles’ research purpose is to improve the poor and the voiceless. This imbalance has made the Allied in an disadvantage position and vunerable to be attacked. For example, Michael Connors has been researching about Pridi Banomyong, Dr. Puey Ungpakorn and Giles because these people are the Allied strategic elites and the Axis’ intention is to destroy them. However, the Allied does not realize this fact.
2. The Axis sent in the non-state actors right after destroying Giles’s dad in 1976. For example, the Nation newspaper was established after Dr. Puey was in exile. Suthichai Yoon, a South Korean migrated to Thailand has been writing with one objective, destroying the Allied inside Thailand. The NGO and the media in Thailand have been dominated by the Axis. Yet the Allied has no intelligence of this fact.
I look at how Lee Jones’ approach in international relations in comparison to Michael Conners, it is black and white. This is the reason why the Axis can make an offensive move. They have multinational researchers, NGO, and media as their tools for an attack, the Allied only have public goods intention.
2.
Spying on the Red Shirts
Seems like people have read into my brief comment more than was there. My intention was simply to ensure that people hear about what went on in Chiang Mai. The more people who know, the more likely it is that these thugs representing the red shirts will be put back in their place.
The news reports described them as red shirts, and Giles conceded that homophobic elements existed in the movement (as they do amongst the yellow shirts).
In any case, I will expand on my position.
I am essentially a red shirt supporter. I regard the yellow shirts as contemptible. But as gay man I was outraged at the terrorism demonstrated by the mob in Chiang Mai against Thai gay and transgendered people, including youth, in blocking a parade with a strong anti-AIDS theme.
Thailand has essentially no history of anti-gay violence. While the extent of gay acceptance is often exaggerated, the phrase that has been used by at least one scholar is “tolerance not acceptance”. I think that’s fairly accurate. Some of the western-educated elites have absorbed western homophobia. And Thai-Chinese are influenced by Chinese homophobia. The gay stereotypes one sees on TV, for example in soap operas and comedy shows, are often deplorable. Strangely, even many gay Thais regard them as funny.
But basically Thais have a non-confrontational, ‘live and let live’ attitude. And everyone seems to have at least one gay or khatoey in their extended family !
So my support for the red shirts is now in question.
Anti-gay factions on either side must be condemned:
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/02/26/politics/politics_30096659.php
Thailand: Love it or leave it
Actually, I am a bit confused about some interpretations of Theravadan Buddhism getting mixed up with Brahministic and Mahanikayan folklore. Firstly, the Pali Canon doesn’t teach anything about racial superiority/inferiority. If there is no place for a “self” and the definition of nibanna (breaking the cylce of samsara) is the liberation from greed, aversion and delusion I wonder how that fits in. Secondly, in Theravadan Buddhism “taking refuge” in the “tripple gem” is not to be mixed up with “savior” figures. They come to simbolize wisdom, truth, and virtue – qualities to be developed by the lay people on their individual path to liberation. Buddhist monks and nuns are not preachers (at least in the Theravadan tradition) but offer “spiritual guidance” to the general Buddhist public as mutual support. For a more detailed explanation please find a lecture on basic aspects of Buddhism by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi at http://www.bodhimonastery.net/bm/about-buddhism/audio/83-the-buddhas-teaching-as-it-is.html
Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi
Red Shirt protest at Government House
It would certainly seem as if Thai government were protecting the yellowshirts and vilifying the redshirts. Its report on Oct 7 was inconclusive and did not assign yellowshirt blame nor do criminal charges appear to be forthcoming.
The very nature of the redshirts is what I find disturbing. There is no real platform that I can discern and local groups can act as they wish, e.g., breaking up Chiang Mai’s gay pride.
Many Thais who crave real change, including Ajarn Ji, think a mass movement is necessary. I disagree: a mass movement is always reduced to its most reactionary element.
In 1960s US, most persuasive actions were taken by individuals or small groups. Others chose to work on the system from within the political parties and we all know how well that worked out!
Some idealistic and realistic philosophy of change in practice, with nonviolent action at its core, is the only element which can win lasting change.
Red Shirt protest at Government House
The incident of the beaten up soldier is still rather obscure. I have heard conflicting accounts, and can’t really comment on them right now before things are more clear.
I would anyhow not overstate this issue. Many police officers were attacked and beaten up by PAD (and especially after the coup by UDD as well). These very common incidents rarely made it into the media.
Spying on the Red Shirts
nice try Frederick ,
however chalk ‘n cheese come to mind
suspect you had more than a passing interest in the parade , would I be correct ?
that of course was NOT the red shirts as the generic term applies
unbiased folks see that the yellows are far ahead in the violence stakes
Spying on the Red Shirts
Frederick
do you have any comments on whether you regard the PAD (yellow shirts) as a legitimate protest movement?
for example I believe that strong homophobic sentiments have been expressed on stage by the PAD and over astv… but I have not heard of any direct confrontations (like the chiang mai group claiming to be part of the red shirt group).
do you think legitimacy comes from group discipline or some such?
what are your criteria for legitimacy?
Red Shirt protest at Government House
hi Nick,
thanks for your coverage…. it was good news the excitement level wasnt up to previous assignments…
do you have any specifics on the “infiltrator beaten up” incident?
like, how badly was he beaten? I believe he was taken to hospital after, was he admitted or released after checkup?
Volunteering to fight in Burma
Laklem is a skunk and opportunist of the first order. For him it’s all about power and prestige, not assisting the Karen people.
He snookered church groups in the U.S. to assist him in his dealings, and now he’s actively working with the SPDC.
I was told that he was hiding in Australia, but it appears that he has now returned to Rangoon. Hopefully the Australian government won’t allow him back in.
Karen Colonel reportedly out on bail
The two telling sentences in the Mizzima article are:
“He said the heightened bilateral relationship between the Burmese military regime and Thailand might have led to the arrest of Col Ner Dah Mya.”
“I think, our Colonel [Ner Dar Mya] has been arrested because the Burmese regime pressurized the Thai Army,” Saw David Taw said.”
The Thai army is being pressured by businessmen to put the squeeze on the KNLA so that they can continue to rape Burma for hardwoods.
Additionally, Thailand stands to benefit from the hydroelectric projects being mounted in Burma.
As one person who posts on here related to me, “the KNLA may be starting to circle the drain”.
Report on “Lèse Majesté in Thailand: The Enemy of Democracy”
To Prasit: I doubt if u are well-informed about what is going on and I don’t think u have read any of Giles’s writing. The following quote from yr own post applies to yrself more than others. Your uninformed comment outrages me and I think u have no right to speak for other Thais but yrself. How do u know that other Thais are indifferent about the draconian law and are as complacent as yrself??? Don’t make easy assumption. It will create wrong impression that all Thais are as insular as u!BTW, I’m Thai.
Quote from Prasit: “When people attacks other personally, they don’t have reason to debate.!…”
Report on “Lèse Majesté in Thailand: The Enemy of Democracy”
One of the greatest things about Ajarn Jai’s outspokenness is that he can’t be dismissed as a Thaksin flunky, because he was always a Thaksin critic. One of the PAD/The Nation’s tactics has been to accuse anybody who disagrees with their positions as being a paid prostitute of Thaksin and his empire–even The Economist is in Thaksin’s back pocket!
Unfortunately, I think this makes life more difficult for Jai, ironically enough. The worst thing in the world for the fascist yellows and the Democrats is to have independent voices opposing them that aren’t linked to Thaksin, which will only make their propaganda machine much more vehement and their fascist tactics more violent and nasty against anybody who dares to challenge them.
One has to ponder what will happen in the next two years. Thailand looks like it is facing an economic and political crisis (as well as a succession crisis) not seen since the 1930s. People seem to forget that it was really the Great Depression that brought down the Absolute Monarchy. Also, the same ideological and proxy political wars are still being fought. I know I will get flack for this, because I don’t want to equate Thaksin with Pridi, but a lot of the charges that are being leveled at Thaksin were leveled at Pridi, everything from lese majeste and republicanism to redistribution of wealth from the aristocrats to the poor and anti-democratic policies against the opposition.
Thailand: Love it or leave it
re: Fred Nerk
Buddhism doesn’t provide any kind of ’saviour figure’
Huh? That’s news to me. Out of the major religions of the world, I would argue that Buddhism is the one most focused on salvation (i.e. liberation from samsara), and that the Buddha and his teachings (the Dharma) provide a symbol and focus for salvation. In Buddhist theology, this concept is refered to as “taking refuge in the Triple Gem (sarana gamana).”
Now of course, there is a huge difference between the soteriology and buddhology of Theravada and Mahayana schools; nevertheless, both clearly view salvation, through the attainment of Nirvana, as the primary focus, and the Triple Gem as a “savior figure” appears in the earliest credos of the Buddhist faith. Indeed, taking refuge in anything else, including a thammaraj would be seen as “unskillful”.
Tej Bunnag speaking in London
is this some sort of “response” to Jais talk?