Thelma Norton: “I was kind of hoping for more discussion of the substantive issues …Connors op-ed had, I think, begun the kind of useful discussion that NM called for a while back. That’s an opportunity lost.”
I agree, but for that details must be addressed.
For instance, there is a UDD sponsored radio station in Bangkok, presumably for taxi drivers, that provides a big list of programmes that supposedly helped rural folk. Well, did they? The analyses that I’ve seen haven’t been very convincing and there doesn’t seem to be have been much local provincial media coverage on how these rural funds were used, whether they are siphoned off as favours for the locally politically connected. A couple of foreign media stories about rural folk does not really do the trick.
There are also agricultural support programmes that are never mentioned here with important questions like who actually gets them? Do local powerful middlemen get them? Do they really use up much of the budget?
Never a mention of Auditor General Jaruvan’s work, supposedly because this would mean violating one’s partisan position.
There is also the crucial issue of central bank independence and the conflict between the current finance minister and the central bank governor who has done a very good job at keeping Thailand’s financial sector sound, but whom of course takes loads of abuse from people who have no long-term perspective as far as the economy is concerned. In light of the current world economic crisis, the capital controls that the central bank was roundly abused for, almost seem presicient.
All of this requires much more mental effort than mindlessly joining the partisan chorus on either side.
AA: Thanks. Very useful indeed. And raises a number of issues that I don’t have much of a clue about at present:
It seems that the usual splits etc. are there in the palace but that they may be getting wider. And, the palace seems to be racing to paper over the cracks and prevent an outpouring of criticism. Maybe that means the coup is not far off? But maybe they will let the fascists on both sides fight it out first.
I’m interested to know how NM readers think it is that Sondhi continues to get away with these seemingly anti-royal attacks? Who is his mentor? Prem? Queen?
Are both sides – pro and anti Thaksin/TRT/PPP – now united in their view that the palace’s time is past?
It does seem a step forward if the palace/throne is now being so heavily criticised that they need to spend millions protecting it. That can go along with the hundreds of billions they also get from state coffers for their rides and physical protection.
“The queen let the genie of a politically engaged royalty out of the bottle. The powers that be are desperately trying to put it back in.”
This is a bit melodramatic, don’t you think? It’s been out of the bottle for years, and Prem — the king’s knight — giving his blessing to the coup two years ago was a clear sign.
What is only interesting is that the queen doesn’t apparently see any risk in openly siding with Sondhi/PAD despite their capriciousness and lack of clear ends. It shows the palace itself does not have a constructive solution, in terms of supplying a strong and capable leader to fill the hole left by Thaksin. It only has the destructiveness of PAD.
So the question is, are they actively playing a destructive political game themselves with no real goal but to destroy the Thaksin forces? Could the palace then be said to be nihilist?
I can confirm, Ralph, that Sondhi did attack Sumet. It appeared on the Manager’s site a few days ago. Not only does it appear that the institution is getting its hands dirty, but the institution appears to have differing opinions: a Princess’s Q&A reply in America, the use of Border Patrol Police, the attacks on the Chaipattana Foundation’s chief, the Ratchaprachanukroah Foundation chief’s recent statements, the Queen and a Princess’s attendance at a funeral, the donations, etc.
Nothing is forever. Suppose the King were to pass before the current polarization ameliorates or while the re-writing of political rules remains hotly contested, the royal institution could find itself in uncharted waters. There was a time in Nepal when its royal institutions seemed invincible. The situations are different, of course, but the more perceptions about royals being “above politics” are questioned, the more the legitimacy of the institution itself comes into question. We still don’t know just how institutionalized the monarchy is. Inevitable events of mortality will bring new knowledge when that day arrives. To hedge against further crisis, the King could abdicate while alive and oversee a smooth transition to his successor. In the meantime, how new internet firewalls and definitions of les majeste are tested in this politically charged environment will be consequential.
I was kind of hoping for more discussion of the substantive issues rather than of a detour into a discussion of names/anonymous submissions. Connors op-ed had, I think, begun the kind of useful discussion that NM called for a while back. That’s an opportunity lost.
now I hope someone recorded video of these broadcasts and the channels should… its proof we and the authorities need
what I am reaally concerned about are the revenue being collected by Sondhi… someone reported the following:
PostToday on this in March of 2006. His media empired milked it quite well. Manager Newspaper reportedly sold roughly 150,000 copies per day at B15 per copy. That’s B67.5 million per month. The CD “Muang Thai Rai Wan” sold 500,000 copies at B79 per. That’s B39.5 million more. The short sleeves T-shirt “We Fight for the \\\ //////” sold no less than 100,000 pcs at B150 per and long sleeves sold roughly 200,000 pcs at B200 per. That’s another B35 million. The pocket book “Muang Thai Rai Sapadah” sold roughly 100,000 pcs at B190 per. There’s B19 million more. About 5000 ASTV satelite dish at B10,900 per dish per month. That’s another B54.5 million per month.
so he will be making at least this again… so why will he be willing to stop?
@ Vorapoap > Saying no warnings were given at 7pm is utter fabrication. I have been lurking on this site reading the blog and am very interested in the constant fabrication of stories (by both sides ?)I watched the events at 7pm live on Thai channels, NBT and TNN ( i was flicking between the 2). They had a male reporter with the police behind the line when the protesters first approached with their trucks (2) The police maintained their line and a senior ‘looking’ police man was talking through a loud speaker, this went on for almost 30 minutes before the protesters came very close to the police line and the front line of the protesters were all masked, wearing motorcylce helmets and had large baton/sticks, some were clearly provoking teh police with verbal assaults. The senrior ‘looking’ police man appeared again and DID warn that tear gas would be fired if protestors did not move back immediately, this was not their first warning, within 60 seconds the protesters were not moving and they were clearly trying to create aggression, suddenly a large padlock was thrown from the protesters side at the police and seconds after tear gas was fired. Funnily enough the tear gas worked, the ‘illegal’ protesters were dispersed, when they tried to regroup and come back at the police more gas was fired, during the dispersements many protesters were throwing objects at the police, the police did NOT rush the protesters, they stayed behind their line. after a few minutes the scene returned to normal (?) the reporter picked up the padlock and showed it to the camera, this was what caused the gas to EVENTUALLY be fired AFTER MANY WARNINGS and repeated agressive behaviour by the protesters.
The back and forth of aggression met by tear gas continued for around 20-30 minutes before an army humvie arrived, my wife explained that the Army had been called in to support the police as they were clearly out numbered. What happened next must have completely destroyed the morale of the police, the army soldiers, all very young indeed, immediately when running over to the protesters with stretchers and first aid kits to assist them !?!?!?! What about the injured police ? Why did they help these people breaking the law, ignoring police instructions to move away from the police line ?
I have no sympathy for the protest organisers, unfortunately i believe that the majority of protesters are either being paid or have been badly manipulated.
Rule of Law Thailand, thats all that really needs to be said, Politics should be on hold whilst Rule of Law is restored to the streets and citizens of Thailand, the police should be supported, the protesters moved to appropriate grounds to protest and their movements limited unless prior authorisation is given.
I personally know of people being paid 800 baht per day to work as guards at the PAD site, i know of protesters working for 300-400 Baht a day (it used to be 200 but since the violence they are being paid more), they are bussed in for free and receive 3 meals a day plus the cash, do they know what they are doing ?
Restore the Rule of Law, once thats done then politics can resume, negotiations, reconcilliation, but now is the time to act, restore law and order to the streets and people of Thailand.
Without severe action this will still be ruining a great nation this time next year.
Dear Sarinda, as posted in an email commentary on Lao Fab, please find below.
Dear Sarinda,
Thanks so much for your very interesting post. I agree with much of what you point to, particularly the challenges in implementing these kind of big rural development initiatives and what it means for people. Like you, my colleagues and I have seen the new-found wealth in some households in Nakai, particularly the numerous motorbike and satellite dishes which no doubt point to increasing income in some households and the benefits of electricity and having good roads. And like you we are concerned about those who are not doing as well — particularly those vulnerable households made up of, say, a widow with young children, whose opportunities may not be the same as her neighbors. These are all challenging issues, and I know my colleagues and I are dealing with them on a daily basis.
From the World Bank side, we are very closely monitoring this situation — both the incomes on a household basis, the income generating opportunities for people, the establishment of the market you referred to, the amount of grazing land for the livestock, etc. While solid plans are there, like you point out, the reality is that when dealing with people’s lives you have to adapt to circumstances and plans will change and need to be adapted to — “Adaptive Management”, as known in ‘development jargon’. This in fact was one of the main principles in the concession agreement, but the challenge is always to make this work in practice. We’re keeping a close eye on the situation, and working with NTPC and the Lao Government to make the changes needed so that the resettled people are better off and double their incomes in the medium-term as set in the concession agreement’s income targets.
If you’re still around in Vientiane, or next time you visit, please let us know. It would be interesting and useful for us to hear the feedback from your trips.
Thanks Michael for these comments. We would greatly prefer that contributers to New Mandala’s discussion use their real names. We accept that in some cases there are strong reasons for pseudonyms but, from our perspective, these are a relatively small number of cases. So why don’t we insist on real names? Simply because such a policy would be impossible to enforce. We don’t have the capacity to invest time in verifying the reality of names that commenters may use. If someone logs on as “Jonathan Wilson” how do we know if it is really “Jonathan Wilson”? We could require a real email address, but we all know how quick and easy it is to set up email account with a false name. Other more detailed forms of verification (street addresses, telephone numbers, job contacts etc) are simply beyond our capacity to check and are probably undesirable in terms of privacy.
In brief, we strongly encourage people commenting on New Mandala to use their real name (and we acknowledge that this encouragement may not have been sufficiently strong in the past). But we are not aware of any practical way of enforcing this.
We also feel that our recent adoption of a rather more active moderating hand in relation to comments has increased the diversity and quality of discussion.
I’ll stand by my argument that Western commentary is largely pro-Thaksin, and I’ll accept too that English media commentary in Thailand is pro-PAD – although that is changing in recent times. I’ve attempted to steer something of line in between. People might see it otherwise.
Someone no doubt will do an exhaustive summary of the western media at some point in time. I suggest starting with the internationally important Wall Street Journal, given its important role in elite opinion formation. If I am wrong, then I am wrong. But several years of reading this stuff on a frequent basis has led me to the conclusion I make.
The preface of my response to Andrew’s piece stating that I was not sure my response would be of much interest reflected that in my view any clarification was simply going over old ground, and was possibly tedious. It led to a comment saying I was dismissive of this blog, and to claims of arrogance. Actually, I read NM regularly. I do not comment much. That is my preference. The political line of the blog is fairly clear, but it is generous in its exposure of a wide and diverse body of opinion. It is a bit more like a magazine than a blog in that sense.
I thought my piece on parliamentary cretinism was quite clear, if read as an intervention at a point in time. I responded to Andrew’s piece because of his claim that I think parliament is meaningless, etc. Apparently though, my piece was not clear, and I accept that people have had a different reading of it. I decline to endlessly defend my position, beyond the initial response posted here. I do think blog discussions can get bogged down, and I didn’t want to engage in that particularly by defending over and over what I thought to be a clear piece of commentary. I am, however, dismissive of challenges and accusations from non-named people or falsely named people. And while I have just bashed the Wall Street Journal let me say I endorse its comments about the use of real names in-on line dialogue. Let me quote:
“Why use your real name? The Journal Community encourages thoughtful dialogue and meaningful connections between real people. We require the use of your full name to authenticate your identity. The quality of conversations can deteriorate when real identities are not provided.”
I think some of the threads in New Mandala are witness to this point. Still, the value of the site far outweighs this problem. I wonder if I will be charged with arrogance, pretension, wankery, pomposity, hypocrisy for making that judgement or rather feeling that I have the right to make it.
If people are speaking about sensitive matters that they feel will land them in gaol or make life difficult back home, then perhaps a fake name is reasonable, but slagging off at others in the luxury of anonymity is tawdry ( I am not referring to comments in this thread). Such a system is also open to abuse. It also leads to a tail off in real people willing to use their real names in discussion. I prefer to know who I am talking with.
And I also agree that Marx had a lot more to say about parliaments than was discussed in my little op-ed.
One thing that might be worrying the old establishment is that PAD are attacking royalists. According to the Manager – reported to me from a reliable source as I didn’t see it myself – Sondhi Lim attacked Sumet Tantivejkul.
amberwaves stated “BTW, it’s sort of discouraging that a scholar would be dismissive of this blog ….” That comment looks stronger now. A few of Dr. Connors media commentary pieces have been reproduced here at NM and he has received, in my view, thoughtful commentary. I would have thought it reasonable for him to respond. No point to academic arrogance or distance when one is writing in the press and blogging. Is Dr. Connors just going to give us pearls of wisdom and not respond to thoughtful commentary?
Let me ask again: is the NHRC a regularized and legally constituted organization? It was canceled under the royalist-military junta. Has it been reconstituted with new legislation?
Still the wrong place but jonfernquest is still not clear on this. Sectoral studies of the Thai economy exist. I am sure that there is no single study of all sectors of the Thai economy based on fieldwork, interviews and archival research. That would be a huge task and would go beyond a single book. In the names provided above, there are sectoral studies that do fit some or all of the criteria suggested by jonfernquest: Doner (on auto sector, electronics, sugar), Sakkarin (on telecoms), Hewison (old now, but has case studies of various sectors), Unger (textiles) and so on. Might look at Brimble as well.
On eastern seaboard, there are theses in Thai and bits and pieces in English. One of the problems with researching the eastern seaboard (and why Muscat is one of the few in English) is that it was a series of planning decisions made non-transparently at the highest levels in the NESDB during Prem’s prime ministership. That opened up a bit after Chartichai sacked Snoh Unakul and downgraded NESDB, but then it got caught up in the buffet cabinet. More work could be done although my guess is that there has been some Japanese work on the topic.
Well, I guess the PAD 70% appointed (by whom I wonder) is really democratic. To add insult to injury the remaining 30% is only eligible to ‘graduates’.
From what I have seen of the academia – particularly the vocal ones and the doctors at a particular hospital etc, the ‘graduates’ are not particularly qualified either.
One must either be ‘dumb’ blind’ or ‘certified incompetent’ to think that Thaksin brought down democracy and the PAD / democratic party of Thailand represents it (democracy)
Trying to have a logical discussion with PADs is like trying to convince some ‘cult’ members that a spaceship from God is not going to pick them up after they drink poison given by their leader!!
Andrew Walker does reject the SE concept as a whole, see his paper “Royal Sufficiency and elite misrepresentation of rural livelihoods”, as well as various articles published here.
Referring to the king’s New Theory in his above paper he argues that “The notion that external linkages should only be developed once there is a foundation in local sufficiency is simply not consistent with the economically diversified livelihood strategies pursued by rural people in contemporary Thailand.” According to him these diversified income patterns are mainly due to the scarcity of fertile land… – Well, there is plenty of unused fertile land in rural Thailand. However, in part it is owned by middle-class Bangkokians as a “safe asset”. This means that the problem is rather the lack of state policies addressing the issue of unjust and uneconomical land distribution.
The New Theory is itself borrowed from the Gandhian concept of an ideal village economy: see Ishii, Kazuya (2001) ‘The Socioeconomic Thoughts of Mahatma Gandhi: As an Origin of Alternative Development’, Review of Social Economy, 59:3, 297 – 312
Thank you Ralph for that list of theses on the Thai economy.
Yes, I have read almost all these people you mention, but…
If one was to write an sector-by-sector overview of the whole Thai economy focusing on historical background and development, I think you could safely say that there is simply not enough fundamental groundwork research using primary sources such as interviews and the obscure sources you often find in Thai Capital. Thailand’s copper industry and newsprint industry are two interesting little niches I’ve learned about recently.
Thai Capital was inspired by the work of Suehiro. One of his students authored the key essay on business groups/families.
Doner’s work focuses mostly on the automobile industry, at least that I’ve seen. Purely economic work that looks solely at gross statistics fails to get at the underlying dynamics of industries, the ways that they are changing and developing. There is also an overwhelming bias in work towards the rural agricultural sector. Muscat mentions in passing a little bit of the planning process behind the Eastern Seaboard during the Prem cabinets, perhaps one of the theses in that list you gave has more. Thanks.
Certainly, an comprehensive bibliography on Thai political economy would help and the Oxford Consulting group in coordination with the BOI and the Bangkok Post has such a sectoral analysis but I haven’t seen it yet (http://www.oxfordbusinessgroup.com/publication.asp?country=43).
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
More from a parliamentary cretin
Thelma Norton: “I was kind of hoping for more discussion of the substantive issues …Connors op-ed had, I think, begun the kind of useful discussion that NM called for a while back. That’s an opportunity lost.”
I agree, but for that details must be addressed.
For instance, there is a UDD sponsored radio station in Bangkok, presumably for taxi drivers, that provides a big list of programmes that supposedly helped rural folk. Well, did they? The analyses that I’ve seen haven’t been very convincing and there doesn’t seem to be have been much local provincial media coverage on how these rural funds were used, whether they are siphoned off as favours for the locally politically connected. A couple of foreign media stories about rural folk does not really do the trick.
There are also agricultural support programmes that are never mentioned here with important questions like who actually gets them? Do local powerful middlemen get them? Do they really use up much of the budget?
Never a mention of Auditor General Jaruvan’s work, supposedly because this would mean violating one’s partisan position.
There is also the crucial issue of central bank independence and the conflict between the current finance minister and the central bank governor who has done a very good job at keeping Thailand’s financial sector sound, but whom of course takes loads of abuse from people who have no long-term perspective as far as the economy is concerned. In light of the current world economic crisis, the capital controls that the central bank was roundly abused for, almost seem presicient.
All of this requires much more mental effort than mindlessly joining the partisan chorus on either side.
Putting the genie back in the bottle
AA: Thanks. Very useful indeed. And raises a number of issues that I don’t have much of a clue about at present:
It seems that the usual splits etc. are there in the palace but that they may be getting wider. And, the palace seems to be racing to paper over the cracks and prevent an outpouring of criticism. Maybe that means the coup is not far off? But maybe they will let the fascists on both sides fight it out first.
I’m interested to know how NM readers think it is that Sondhi continues to get away with these seemingly anti-royal attacks? Who is his mentor? Prem? Queen?
Are both sides – pro and anti Thaksin/TRT/PPP – now united in their view that the palace’s time is past?
It does seem a step forward if the palace/throne is now being so heavily criticised that they need to spend millions protecting it. That can go along with the hundreds of billions they also get from state coffers for their rides and physical protection.
Putting the genie back in the bottle
“The queen let the genie of a politically engaged royalty out of the bottle. The powers that be are desperately trying to put it back in.”
This is a bit melodramatic, don’t you think? It’s been out of the bottle for years, and Prem — the king’s knight — giving his blessing to the coup two years ago was a clear sign.
What is only interesting is that the queen doesn’t apparently see any risk in openly siding with Sondhi/PAD despite their capriciousness and lack of clear ends. It shows the palace itself does not have a constructive solution, in terms of supplying a strong and capable leader to fill the hole left by Thaksin. It only has the destructiveness of PAD.
So the question is, are they actively playing a destructive political game themselves with no real goal but to destroy the Thaksin forces? Could the palace then be said to be nihilist?
Putting the genie back in the bottle
I can confirm, Ralph, that Sondhi did attack Sumet. It appeared on the Manager’s site a few days ago. Not only does it appear that the institution is getting its hands dirty, but the institution appears to have differing opinions: a Princess’s Q&A reply in America, the use of Border Patrol Police, the attacks on the Chaipattana Foundation’s chief, the Ratchaprachanukroah Foundation chief’s recent statements, the Queen and a Princess’s attendance at a funeral, the donations, etc.
Putting the genie back in the bottle
Nothing is forever. Suppose the King were to pass before the current polarization ameliorates or while the re-writing of political rules remains hotly contested, the royal institution could find itself in uncharted waters. There was a time in Nepal when its royal institutions seemed invincible. The situations are different, of course, but the more perceptions about royals being “above politics” are questioned, the more the legitimacy of the institution itself comes into question. We still don’t know just how institutionalized the monarchy is. Inevitable events of mortality will bring new knowledge when that day arrives. To hedge against further crisis, the King could abdicate while alive and oversee a smooth transition to his successor. In the meantime, how new internet firewalls and definitions of les majeste are tested in this politically charged environment will be consequential.
More from a parliamentary cretin
I was kind of hoping for more discussion of the substantive issues rather than of a detour into a discussion of names/anonymous submissions. Connors op-ed had, I think, begun the kind of useful discussion that NM called for a while back. That’s an opportunity lost.
What happened on 7/10/2008?
Soft Farrang…. thank you
now I hope someone recorded video of these broadcasts and the channels should… its proof we and the authorities need
what I am reaally concerned about are the revenue being collected by Sondhi… someone reported the following:
PostToday on this in March of 2006. His media empired milked it quite well. Manager Newspaper reportedly sold roughly 150,000 copies per day at B15 per copy. That’s B67.5 million per month. The CD “Muang Thai Rai Wan” sold 500,000 copies at B79 per. That’s B39.5 million more. The short sleeves T-shirt “We Fight for the \\\ //////” sold no less than 100,000 pcs at B150 per and long sleeves sold roughly 200,000 pcs at B200 per. That’s another B35 million. The pocket book “Muang Thai Rai Sapadah” sold roughly 100,000 pcs at B190 per. There’s B19 million more. About 5000 ASTV satelite dish at B10,900 per dish per month. That’s another B54.5 million per month.
so he will be making at least this again… so why will he be willing to stop?
What happened on 7/10/2008?
@ Vorapoap > Saying no warnings were given at 7pm is utter fabrication. I have been lurking on this site reading the blog and am very interested in the constant fabrication of stories (by both sides ?)I watched the events at 7pm live on Thai channels, NBT and TNN ( i was flicking between the 2). They had a male reporter with the police behind the line when the protesters first approached with their trucks (2) The police maintained their line and a senior ‘looking’ police man was talking through a loud speaker, this went on for almost 30 minutes before the protesters came very close to the police line and the front line of the protesters were all masked, wearing motorcylce helmets and had large baton/sticks, some were clearly provoking teh police with verbal assaults. The senrior ‘looking’ police man appeared again and DID warn that tear gas would be fired if protestors did not move back immediately, this was not their first warning, within 60 seconds the protesters were not moving and they were clearly trying to create aggression, suddenly a large padlock was thrown from the protesters side at the police and seconds after tear gas was fired. Funnily enough the tear gas worked, the ‘illegal’ protesters were dispersed, when they tried to regroup and come back at the police more gas was fired, during the dispersements many protesters were throwing objects at the police, the police did NOT rush the protesters, they stayed behind their line. after a few minutes the scene returned to normal (?) the reporter picked up the padlock and showed it to the camera, this was what caused the gas to EVENTUALLY be fired AFTER MANY WARNINGS and repeated agressive behaviour by the protesters.
The back and forth of aggression met by tear gas continued for around 20-30 minutes before an army humvie arrived, my wife explained that the Army had been called in to support the police as they were clearly out numbered. What happened next must have completely destroyed the morale of the police, the army soldiers, all very young indeed, immediately when running over to the protesters with stretchers and first aid kits to assist them !?!?!?! What about the injured police ? Why did they help these people breaking the law, ignoring police instructions to move away from the police line ?
I have no sympathy for the protest organisers, unfortunately i believe that the majority of protesters are either being paid or have been badly manipulated.
Rule of Law Thailand, thats all that really needs to be said, Politics should be on hold whilst Rule of Law is restored to the streets and citizens of Thailand, the police should be supported, the protesters moved to appropriate grounds to protest and their movements limited unless prior authorisation is given.
I personally know of people being paid 800 baht per day to work as guards at the PAD site, i know of protesters working for 300-400 Baht a day (it used to be 200 but since the violence they are being paid more), they are bussed in for free and receive 3 meals a day plus the cash, do they know what they are doing ?
Restore the Rule of Law, once thats done then politics can resume, negotiations, reconcilliation, but now is the time to act, restore law and order to the streets and people of Thailand.
Without severe action this will still be ruining a great nation this time next year.
Nam Theun 2 resettlement: The uncertainties of livelihood change
Dear Sarinda, as posted in an email commentary on Lao Fab, please find below.
Dear Sarinda,
Thanks so much for your very interesting post. I agree with much of what you point to, particularly the challenges in implementing these kind of big rural development initiatives and what it means for people. Like you, my colleagues and I have seen the new-found wealth in some households in Nakai, particularly the numerous motorbike and satellite dishes which no doubt point to increasing income in some households and the benefits of electricity and having good roads. And like you we are concerned about those who are not doing as well — particularly those vulnerable households made up of, say, a widow with young children, whose opportunities may not be the same as her neighbors. These are all challenging issues, and I know my colleagues and I are dealing with them on a daily basis.
From the World Bank side, we are very closely monitoring this situation — both the incomes on a household basis, the income generating opportunities for people, the establishment of the market you referred to, the amount of grazing land for the livestock, etc. While solid plans are there, like you point out, the reality is that when dealing with people’s lives you have to adapt to circumstances and plans will change and need to be adapted to — “Adaptive Management”, as known in ‘development jargon’. This in fact was one of the main principles in the concession agreement, but the challenge is always to make this work in practice. We’re keeping a close eye on the situation, and working with NTPC and the Lao Government to make the changes needed so that the resettled people are better off and double their incomes in the medium-term as set in the concession agreement’s income targets.
If you’re still around in Vientiane, or next time you visit, please let us know. It would be interesting and useful for us to hear the feedback from your trips.
Best,
Nanda
More from a parliamentary cretin
Thanks Michael for these comments. We would greatly prefer that contributers to New Mandala’s discussion use their real names. We accept that in some cases there are strong reasons for pseudonyms but, from our perspective, these are a relatively small number of cases. So why don’t we insist on real names? Simply because such a policy would be impossible to enforce. We don’t have the capacity to invest time in verifying the reality of names that commenters may use. If someone logs on as “Jonathan Wilson” how do we know if it is really “Jonathan Wilson”? We could require a real email address, but we all know how quick and easy it is to set up email account with a false name. Other more detailed forms of verification (street addresses, telephone numbers, job contacts etc) are simply beyond our capacity to check and are probably undesirable in terms of privacy.
In brief, we strongly encourage people commenting on New Mandala to use their real name (and we acknowledge that this encouragement may not have been sufficiently strong in the past). But we are not aware of any practical way of enforcing this.
We also feel that our recent adoption of a rather more active moderating hand in relation to comments has increased the diversity and quality of discussion.
Putting the genie back in the bottle
Amid the current Internet messages critical of royalty, a sensible move should be to ascertain why this is so, rather than just to suppress them.
More from a parliamentary cretin
I’ll stand by my argument that Western commentary is largely pro-Thaksin, and I’ll accept too that English media commentary in Thailand is pro-PAD – although that is changing in recent times. I’ve attempted to steer something of line in between. People might see it otherwise.
Someone no doubt will do an exhaustive summary of the western media at some point in time. I suggest starting with the internationally important Wall Street Journal, given its important role in elite opinion formation. If I am wrong, then I am wrong. But several years of reading this stuff on a frequent basis has led me to the conclusion I make.
The preface of my response to Andrew’s piece stating that I was not sure my response would be of much interest reflected that in my view any clarification was simply going over old ground, and was possibly tedious. It led to a comment saying I was dismissive of this blog, and to claims of arrogance. Actually, I read NM regularly. I do not comment much. That is my preference. The political line of the blog is fairly clear, but it is generous in its exposure of a wide and diverse body of opinion. It is a bit more like a magazine than a blog in that sense.
I thought my piece on parliamentary cretinism was quite clear, if read as an intervention at a point in time. I responded to Andrew’s piece because of his claim that I think parliament is meaningless, etc. Apparently though, my piece was not clear, and I accept that people have had a different reading of it. I decline to endlessly defend my position, beyond the initial response posted here. I do think blog discussions can get bogged down, and I didn’t want to engage in that particularly by defending over and over what I thought to be a clear piece of commentary. I am, however, dismissive of challenges and accusations from non-named people or falsely named people. And while I have just bashed the Wall Street Journal let me say I endorse its comments about the use of real names in-on line dialogue. Let me quote:
“Why use your real name? The Journal Community encourages thoughtful dialogue and meaningful connections between real people. We require the use of your full name to authenticate your identity. The quality of conversations can deteriorate when real identities are not provided.”
I think some of the threads in New Mandala are witness to this point. Still, the value of the site far outweighs this problem. I wonder if I will be charged with arrogance, pretension, wankery, pomposity, hypocrisy for making that judgement or rather feeling that I have the right to make it.
If people are speaking about sensitive matters that they feel will land them in gaol or make life difficult back home, then perhaps a fake name is reasonable, but slagging off at others in the luxury of anonymity is tawdry ( I am not referring to comments in this thread). Such a system is also open to abuse. It also leads to a tail off in real people willing to use their real names in discussion. I prefer to know who I am talking with.
And I also agree that Marx had a lot more to say about parliaments than was discussed in my little op-ed.
Putting the genie back in the bottle
One thing that might be worrying the old establishment is that PAD are attacking royalists. According to the Manager – reported to me from a reliable source as I didn’t see it myself – Sondhi Lim attacked Sumet Tantivejkul.
More from a parliamentary cretin
amberwaves stated “BTW, it’s sort of discouraging that a scholar would be dismissive of this blog ….” That comment looks stronger now. A few of Dr. Connors media commentary pieces have been reproduced here at NM and he has received, in my view, thoughtful commentary. I would have thought it reasonable for him to respond. No point to academic arrogance or distance when one is writing in the press and blogging. Is Dr. Connors just going to give us pearls of wisdom and not respond to thoughtful commentary?
What happened on 7/10/2008?
Let me ask again: is the NHRC a regularized and legally constituted organization? It was canceled under the royalist-military junta. Has it been reconstituted with new legislation?
Ashley South on liberal-democratic interventions
Still the wrong place but jonfernquest is still not clear on this. Sectoral studies of the Thai economy exist. I am sure that there is no single study of all sectors of the Thai economy based on fieldwork, interviews and archival research. That would be a huge task and would go beyond a single book. In the names provided above, there are sectoral studies that do fit some or all of the criteria suggested by jonfernquest: Doner (on auto sector, electronics, sugar), Sakkarin (on telecoms), Hewison (old now, but has case studies of various sectors), Unger (textiles) and so on. Might look at Brimble as well.
On eastern seaboard, there are theses in Thai and bits and pieces in English. One of the problems with researching the eastern seaboard (and why Muscat is one of the few in English) is that it was a series of planning decisions made non-transparently at the highest levels in the NESDB during Prem’s prime ministership. That opened up a bit after Chartichai sacked Snoh Unakul and downgraded NESDB, but then it got caught up in the buffet cabinet. More work could be done although my guess is that there has been some Japanese work on the topic.
More from a parliamentary cretin
Well, I guess the PAD 70% appointed (by whom I wonder) is really democratic. To add insult to injury the remaining 30% is only eligible to ‘graduates’.
From what I have seen of the academia – particularly the vocal ones and the doctors at a particular hospital etc, the ‘graduates’ are not particularly qualified either.
One must either be ‘dumb’ blind’ or ‘certified incompetent’ to think that Thaksin brought down democracy and the PAD / democratic party of Thailand represents it (democracy)
Trying to have a logical discussion with PADs is like trying to convince some ‘cult’ members that a spaceship from God is not going to pick them up after they drink poison given by their leader!!
Sufficiency economy gurus
RE: Lleij Samuel Schwartz
Andrew Walker does reject the SE concept as a whole, see his paper “Royal Sufficiency and elite misrepresentation of rural livelihoods”, as well as various articles published here.
Referring to the king’s New Theory in his above paper he argues that “The notion that external linkages should only be developed once there is a foundation in local sufficiency is simply not consistent with the economically diversified livelihood strategies pursued by rural people in contemporary Thailand.” According to him these diversified income patterns are mainly due to the scarcity of fertile land… – Well, there is plenty of unused fertile land in rural Thailand. However, in part it is owned by middle-class Bangkokians as a “safe asset”. This means that the problem is rather the lack of state policies addressing the issue of unjust and uneconomical land distribution.
The New Theory is itself borrowed from the Gandhian concept of an ideal village economy: see Ishii, Kazuya (2001) ‘The Socioeconomic Thoughts of Mahatma Gandhi: As an Origin of Alternative Development’, Review of Social Economy, 59:3, 297 – 312
Sufficiency economy gurus
all are sufficient, but some are more sufficient then others…
Ashley South on liberal-democratic interventions
Thank you Ralph for that list of theses on the Thai economy.
Yes, I have read almost all these people you mention, but…
If one was to write an sector-by-sector overview of the whole Thai economy focusing on historical background and development, I think you could safely say that there is simply not enough fundamental groundwork research using primary sources such as interviews and the obscure sources you often find in Thai Capital. Thailand’s copper industry and newsprint industry are two interesting little niches I’ve learned about recently.
Thai Capital was inspired by the work of Suehiro. One of his students authored the key essay on business groups/families.
Doner’s work focuses mostly on the automobile industry, at least that I’ve seen. Purely economic work that looks solely at gross statistics fails to get at the underlying dynamics of industries, the ways that they are changing and developing. There is also an overwhelming bias in work towards the rural agricultural sector. Muscat mentions in passing a little bit of the planning process behind the Eastern Seaboard during the Prem cabinets, perhaps one of the theses in that list you gave has more. Thanks.
Certainly, an comprehensive bibliography on Thai political economy would help and the Oxford Consulting group in coordination with the BOI and the Bangkok Post has such a sectoral analysis but I haven’t seen it yet (http://www.oxfordbusinessgroup.com/publication.asp?country=43).