Artisi’s comments are totally inappropriate and simply wrong. Just one example: “who cares, certainly not the people of Thailand who are the ones directly involved in this current situation.” Every Thai I have spoken to over the past 2 years is vitally interested. Every newspaper in Thai is full of this stuff. The web blogs are, likewise, crammed with discussion of this. The argument that what happens in Thailand only matters to Thais (however defined) is unworthy of further comment.
I can understand the disgust with Samak, and Thaksin before him, but it is difficult to see why there is no real public focusing around the issue of threats to democracy. Why is it that the “I can’t stand Samak/Thaksin but object to the PAD” crowd so small? (would that be the orange crowd?).
someone else commented that the courts are being used, as intended and setup by the military junta, to attack democratically elected governments detail by detail
elsewhere I have commented somewhat of a private theory that:
“the advantage of democratically elected government is they are more open and transparent than the usual government run by secret, corrupt, powerful (Bangkok) elites who do their deals over golf which like the confessional hides all secrets…
so what do we want, corruption you dont know about (for example a lot of powerful people siphoning funds from the underground lottery) or corruption the legal system can investigate and deal with?
The TRT was less corrupt than previous governments and there was less corruption in Thai society than in previous governments. cracking down on drugs/dark influences (i.e mafia gangs). legalising the underground lottery, the village fund and greater access to personal credit. Mafia gangs who demanded money from motorcycle taxis were severely crippled.
But mostly it was the rich and military elite that were living off these
scams and crimes that were affected. It is mainly the poor and
lower-middle class who benefited.
This is why the PAD and their backers are trying so hard to revert to
the old pattern where they controlled the funds. They hate the idea that ordinary people have gained some measure of control and influence in the way Thailand is governed.
and just add another comment for those that mention farang democratic governments… the most infamous scam in those societies is that the rich find loopholes to legally avoid tax, its not a political problem at all, its a legal problem… so the Thai rich should just start studying tax law instead of trying to destroy their maturing democratic society ‘
and by the way and relevant……….
the Nation reports today that the court has a problem because there is no “hard” evidence to convict in the Ratchadaphisek land case
I guess they mean there is no actual evidence only some “soft” emotional, non-objective claims to go on
so, a delay is convenient to hide the result pending some political or other change that will benefit the PAD and the courts other mates.
Whether 98 or 99, this probably boils down to the same date/year (whether wrong or correct). I find that most ethnic Lao who do (claim to) know their date/year of birth often state that they are, for example, 35 when in fact they are only turning 35 (often using western calendar years as reference point). These government journalists may well use the same method of calculation which would thus be rather a reflection of thinking about age than of not seeing the importance of reporting factual information.
Not sure how the difference between Stuart-Fox’s ‘94’ and the paper’s 98/99 can be explained though. Having said this, I have frequently come across cases in which (ethnic) Lao who (claim to) know their date/year of birth respond in ways like: ‘I’m 35 but according to my family book I’m 32 because… (and here reasons differ from purposeful interventions to simple mistakes in copying).
What I find interesting is that despite all this well-known inaccuracy and not knowing about dates of birth, and in a society in which relative age is clearly more important than absolute biological age, references to ‘absolute age’ are so common in various spheres of life (e.g. entry to temple, mass organizations, etc) – and increasingly so in the evolving legislation (e.g. the new ‘children’s law’).
Lee Kwan Yew is not a tyrannical dictator – He is much more clever than this. Benevolent dictators rule for longer, amass more wealth by keeping the public happy with the crumbs whilst they enjoy the banquet. Singapore works yes – but for how much longer? Remember running a city is different to running a country but ultimately if your opress people, and opression through dumbing down is just as bad as oppression with guns this will eventually fail. The relevance of the Yew’s is diminshing, Lee the son has none of his father’s charismatic appeal and eventually the people will realise that a free election has to have more than one party and, who knows – perhaps better people can run Singapore and allow Singaporeans to challenge themselves and take the country forward. As long as they rely on the Yew’s to look after them, Singapore will never be what Singapore Can Be !
Ed Norton: “Actually, a couple of days ago, I spent sometime writing a comment …suggesting a bunch of references on vote-buying. However, that has never appeared. If that kind of post, linking to a bunch of comments and to some academic literature is outside the scope of NM, then I am wondering what is acceptable? Or is it that my post just disappeared in cyberspace?”
There is a problem with spam blocking software that puts posts with links into a spam bucket. Sometimes these postings get through, sometimes not.
I wouldn’t blame it on moderator intervention. Thank you for those postings, even though I didn’t get to read them.
Observer: “Apart from the real name matter, how about a way for readers to vote to “trash” certain comments? E.G. providing a click for “Trash it” at the end of each comment and if x number of voters click it, that comment goes to the bin.”
Doesn’t sound like freedom of speech. Delete what the majority doesn’t want to hear? No minority voice? That is “democracy”?
Editor (NF): Please note that the comment by Ed Norton is now available here. It has been saved from the spam filter. Sorry for any temporary inconvenience this may have caused.
Frankly, punditry on mainstream Thai politics is a completely unproductive waste of time
I agree, but it can also be a form of entertainment.
Also, Nich & Andrew have done their fair share of Punditry – whether that was done to get the site going, or part of a wider agenda I do not know, but I suspect this recent change in policy is an attempt to censor views that differ from the Jim Taylor’s of this site.
Thanks for the site – It was fun while it lasted
🙂
hi
im thinking of writing a research paper on this topic and would like to have a copy of the book in both thai and english.
digital copy would be fine but does anyone have a hard copy i can buy from??
There are two issues here: quality of comments and responsibility of comment(ators). The two are not the same but they do overlap in certain ways.
Webblog and webboards are new media. It opens up mass participation. It is cheap and easy. Many good and bad things come along with this new media. Never before do we get to hear the voices of people who otherwise might not want to express themselves in public. Exactly because of that, along comes the silly and often time irresponsible posting that spread false allegation, unfound rumor, and so on. To be fair, many comments are decent, respectable and very good without having to sign their real names.
I think people need and will develop their taste for good and not good web discussions. Perhaps sometime in the future there will be websites that suit to different tastes, like the quality newspapers versus the tabloids among the print media. In the meantime, we have to be aware that trash and treasure are mixed. We (all of us) have tolerated to trash without doing much to help improve the quality of discussion.
I am sympathetic to Andrew and Nich for their efforts to improve the quality of NM. [I myself stop visiting NM some time ago for not wanting to waste time reading irresponsible posting. Thanks a friend who alert me of this topic; otherwise I wouldn’t have looked at NM now]. I disagree with criticism that editorial intervention equals “elitism” or a divine power from above. They are trying to do what other editors do. But it could be counter productive or defeat the characteristics of the new media. It might not be the right medicine.
Is there any way for readers to help control and improve the quality? Please help Andrew and Nich think. If we love the open participation of the new media, we should take care of it too, for our shared benefits.
Many suggest that using real names might help improve both the quality and responsibility. I am not sure, but I can understand the reasons. If we agree for now that it might help, how about two parallel sets of comments: one by those who use real names and one by those who don’t? (This would minimize the editor’s intervention as well.)
How about creating an incentive for real names and disincentive for the unnamed — such as reducing the font size of all unnamed comments to the degree of readability but with some efforts, while leaving the named comments to the normal size? Or how about allowing the named comments on the site for longer time than the unnamed comments (that shall be removed after a shorter period)?
Apart from the real name matter, how about a way for readers to vote to “trash” certain comments? E.G. providing a click for “Trash it” at the end of each comment and if x number of voters click it, that comment goes to the bin. The editor may override the votes. Then, the editors would look only those that are trashed to prevent a foul play, instead of having to screeening the quality of all comments.
The report is a good piece. Seen from a distance (of time, law, and many other abstractions), the times of opium cultivation in the hills were pretty good. But the triangulation of ecology, society, and the law is a selective focus. In some areas, impoverished (and addicted?) Karen did a lot of the heavy field work for Lisu and Hmong in the north of Thailand (before the 1970s), and Akha for the Mien in Muong Sing (before the 1960s). While the “society” engaged in the production appears to be thriving (and trade monopolies and taxation do not come into view), the process created or accentuated various kinds of regional (intra- and inter-ethnic) inequalities. The “disappearing” poor laborers (an underclass of sorts) is perhaps comparable to the cross-border Shan who do the heavy agricultural work for the communities that are supposedly benefitting from the Royal Project in the north of Thailand.
To be honest, I am not sure how this will work. How can one be sure of blog quality? Is the basic idea to make it academic rather than political? I personally like the idea of quick commenting. If I want to write an academic paper I have other outlets. Actually, a couple of days ago, I spent sometime writing a comment – actually attacking two other commentators, but in a reasonably polite way, suggesting a bunch of references on vote-buying. However, that has never appeared. If that kind of post, linking to a bunch of comments and to some academic literature is outside the scope of NM, then I am wondering what is acceptable? Or is it that my post just disappeared in cyberspace?
If it aint broke, don’t fix it. You run the risk of ruining a fairly good forum (much better – freer & more open – than the Pundit club, IMO).
Leave the Bkk politics in – it’s terrific. Keep it all just as is. It’s too late! NM’s character is established. “Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained.” O.K, so slap ranters like Republican over the wrists (I’m talking about his long, boring, repetitive series of a few months ago) with a wrist-slapping warning-post. But please don’t get into censorship.
Srithanonchai #5, I do agree with your final paragraph, but can’t entirely agree with the ‘letters to the editor’ idea: it’s a new & different medium, and NM allows for real (extended) discussion, in a way that newspapers (& many blog-sites) don’t – even though some participants are not as well informed as others. Look at some of the longer threads. They’ve gone through boring patches & suddenly sparked back into life. And dialogues like that between Teth and Sidh – where else would we see stuff like that? (Where are they now BTW?) NM is good, when it’s good, and productive, ditto, and has sometimes produced exceptional stuff out of non-academics as well as from collisions of academics with non-academics, by accident as it were, because it’s been loose.
“Based on past experience, comments which carry a real name will generally be more likely to satisfy our evolving criteria………… Thank you for your patience as this new system is trialled over the coming weeks. We hope that our large and growing readership finds it a beneficial change.” Bloody hell! Here’s a little exercise for you: Read those 2 paragraphs aloud in a falsetto voice.
You want me to live my real name and discuss issues like Thai Politics and Human Rights? Sorry, I value my life and freedom, so as always no real Name.
Little Piranha Fish: “Why not leave issues like PAD Vs DAAD to Bangkok Pundit and so free yourself up to deal with those other far more interesting regional issues with which you deal so well?”
What a wonderful idea. For three years I have been pulling articles out of the newspaper I work for, explaining vocabulary, and sometimes writing close-ended and open-ended questions, and it always struck me how the diverse range of English language newspaper articles in Thailand, particularly that get down to the details of how the Thai economy operates and functions, are considered unworthy of blogging, whereas the more contentious in-the-news political stuff, always was.
Last year the big economic issue was exporters fretting about currency appreciation, this year it has been escalating food and oil prices, LPG and other subsidies, as well as central bank independence and the laws that the cou-appointed legislature passed so hurriedly, especially the broadcasting liberalisation bill.
Contentious political issues are guaranteed to generate semi-rational responses as they do on top academic blogs like Brad De-Long’s economics blog at UC Berkeley. Brad De-Long once likened what happens in his comments section to a food fight.
It is perhaps worth noting that the quality of replies is far superior on topics that do not dwell on the current Thai political stalemate. Just a suggestion. Why not leave issues like PAD Vs DAAD to Bangkok Pundit and so free yourself up to deal with those other far more interesting regional issues with which you deal so well? Frankly, punditry on mainstream Thai politics is a completely unproductive waste of time. More issues on real rural people would help, as they are far more interesting than the likes of Newin ‘Boring’ Chidchob, ‘Im Indoors or Bangkok’s middle-class class.
Having a bias towards comments using a real name is going to give you a bias towards comments that favor the government in places where people have a realistic fear of the consequences of open speech.
I would have to stop commenting on Thailand because do say what I want to say using my real name would be too dangerous to be worthwhile. Anonymity is not evil.
The long discussion on the a Cambridge team sounds interesting nothwithstanding the varied opinions that came through.As a scholar interested in events of the Second World War in North East India, I would be glad if the trip materialises and we get photographs of graves of unknown Indians both civilians and army men.
Why is it that in discussion groups such as this one – many seems to be hell-bent on trying to win points on how smart I am – I know more than you and my opinion is the only one worth considering because “I know”.
What I know is, that at the end of the day the Thai people will settle their problem in their own way, whether to the satisfaction of outsiders is irrelevent as it is solely their business . In addition, the opinion of non-Thais on what the Thai people should or shouldn’t do is about as useful as t*ts on a bull – why waste time writting pages of pointless analysis on whether the “reds” are better / worse than the “yellows”, PAD is better than PPP etc. – who cares, certainly not the people of Thailand who are the ones directly involved in this current situation.
Just yesterday, I had a long talk with a professor from Germany. New Mandala also came up. He complained that most comments were clearly sub-standard, on which I argued that the core importance of NM were its posts and the large readership, not necessarily its comments.
However, I had to agree with him that most comments had become like letters to the editor of a newspaper, that is, not very tempting to respond on, but still a legitimate way of expressing opinions. And you simply cannot expect that such letters, or comments to New Mandala, are mostly written by people who intellectually are at a similarly high level as seem to be the standard of post-docs or research fellows at RSPAS.
If you are really serious with your criteria, hardly any of the more frequent commentators on New Mandala will ever again see their comments appear on this blog.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Beyond the stereotypes of Thailand’s “Reds”
Artisi’s comments are totally inappropriate and simply wrong. Just one example: “who cares, certainly not the people of Thailand who are the ones directly involved in this current situation.” Every Thai I have spoken to over the past 2 years is vitally interested. Every newspaper in Thai is full of this stuff. The web blogs are, likewise, crammed with discussion of this. The argument that what happens in Thailand only matters to Thais (however defined) is unworthy of further comment.
Beyond the stereotypes of Thailand’s “Reds”
I can understand the disgust with Samak, and Thaksin before him, but it is difficult to see why there is no real public focusing around the issue of threats to democracy. Why is it that the “I can’t stand Samak/Thaksin but object to the PAD” crowd so small? (would that be the orange crowd?).
The Thai circus continues
someone else commented that the courts are being used, as intended and setup by the military junta, to attack democratically elected governments detail by detail
elsewhere I have commented somewhat of a private theory that:
“the advantage of democratically elected government is they are more open and transparent than the usual government run by secret, corrupt, powerful (Bangkok) elites who do their deals over golf which like the confessional hides all secrets…
so what do we want, corruption you dont know about (for example a lot of powerful people siphoning funds from the underground lottery) or corruption the legal system can investigate and deal with?
The TRT was less corrupt than previous governments and there was less corruption in Thai society than in previous governments. cracking down on drugs/dark influences (i.e mafia gangs). legalising the underground lottery, the village fund and greater access to personal credit. Mafia gangs who demanded money from motorcycle taxis were severely crippled.
But mostly it was the rich and military elite that were living off these
scams and crimes that were affected. It is mainly the poor and
lower-middle class who benefited.
This is why the PAD and their backers are trying so hard to revert to
the old pattern where they controlled the funds. They hate the idea that ordinary people have gained some measure of control and influence in the way Thailand is governed.
and just add another comment for those that mention farang democratic governments… the most infamous scam in those societies is that the rich find loopholes to legally avoid tax, its not a political problem at all, its a legal problem… so the Thai rich should just start studying tax law instead of trying to destroy their maturing democratic society ‘
and by the way and relevant……….
the Nation reports today that the court has a problem because there is no “hard” evidence to convict in the Ratchadaphisek land case
I guess they mean there is no actual evidence only some “soft” emotional, non-objective claims to go on
so, a delay is convenient to hide the result pending some political or other change that will benefit the PAD and the courts other mates.
Obituary: Nouhak Phoumsavanh
Whether 98 or 99, this probably boils down to the same date/year (whether wrong or correct). I find that most ethnic Lao who do (claim to) know their date/year of birth often state that they are, for example, 35 when in fact they are only turning 35 (often using western calendar years as reference point). These government journalists may well use the same method of calculation which would thus be rather a reflection of thinking about age than of not seeing the importance of reporting factual information.
Not sure how the difference between Stuart-Fox’s ‘94’ and the paper’s 98/99 can be explained though. Having said this, I have frequently come across cases in which (ethnic) Lao who (claim to) know their date/year of birth respond in ways like: ‘I’m 35 but according to my family book I’m 32 because… (and here reasons differ from purposeful interventions to simple mistakes in copying).
What I find interesting is that despite all this well-known inaccuracy and not knowing about dates of birth, and in a society in which relative age is clearly more important than absolute biological age, references to ‘absolute age’ are so common in various spheres of life (e.g. entry to temple, mass organizations, etc) – and increasingly so in the evolving legislation (e.g. the new ‘children’s law’).
“Lee Kuan Yew – ANU is not for you!”
Lee Kwan Yew is not a tyrannical dictator – He is much more clever than this. Benevolent dictators rule for longer, amass more wealth by keeping the public happy with the crumbs whilst they enjoy the banquet. Singapore works yes – but for how much longer? Remember running a city is different to running a country but ultimately if your opress people, and opression through dumbing down is just as bad as oppression with guns this will eventually fail. The relevance of the Yew’s is diminshing, Lee the son has none of his father’s charismatic appeal and eventually the people will realise that a free election has to have more than one party and, who knows – perhaps better people can run Singapore and allow Singaporeans to challenge themselves and take the country forward. As long as they rely on the Yew’s to look after them, Singapore will never be what Singapore Can Be !
New Mandala comments policy
Ed Norton: “Actually, a couple of days ago, I spent sometime writing a comment …suggesting a bunch of references on vote-buying. However, that has never appeared. If that kind of post, linking to a bunch of comments and to some academic literature is outside the scope of NM, then I am wondering what is acceptable? Or is it that my post just disappeared in cyberspace?”
There is a problem with spam blocking software that puts posts with links into a spam bucket. Sometimes these postings get through, sometimes not.
I wouldn’t blame it on moderator intervention. Thank you for those postings, even though I didn’t get to read them.
Observer: “Apart from the real name matter, how about a way for readers to vote to “trash” certain comments? E.G. providing a click for “Trash it” at the end of each comment and if x number of voters click it, that comment goes to the bin.”
Doesn’t sound like freedom of speech. Delete what the majority doesn’t want to hear? No minority voice? That is “democracy”?
Editor (NF): Please note that the comment by Ed Norton is now available here. It has been saved from the spam filter. Sorry for any temporary inconvenience this may have caused.
Thailand’s crown prince
James Jones,
If he knew that you ‘ve been lurking around reading blog like this one, he probably won’t invite you.
New Mandala comments policy
Frankly, punditry on mainstream Thai politics is a completely unproductive waste of time
I agree, but it can also be a form of entertainment.
Also, Nich & Andrew have done their fair share of Punditry – whether that was done to get the site going, or part of a wider agenda I do not know, but I suspect this recent change in policy is an attempt to censor views that differ from the Jim Taylor’s of this site.
Thanks for the site – It was fun while it lasted
🙂
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
hi
im thinking of writing a research paper on this topic and would like to have a copy of the book in both thai and english.
digital copy would be fine but does anyone have a hard copy i can buy from??
thank you
Natalie
New Mandala comments policy
There are two issues here: quality of comments and responsibility of comment(ators). The two are not the same but they do overlap in certain ways.
Webblog and webboards are new media. It opens up mass participation. It is cheap and easy. Many good and bad things come along with this new media. Never before do we get to hear the voices of people who otherwise might not want to express themselves in public. Exactly because of that, along comes the silly and often time irresponsible posting that spread false allegation, unfound rumor, and so on. To be fair, many comments are decent, respectable and very good without having to sign their real names.
I think people need and will develop their taste for good and not good web discussions. Perhaps sometime in the future there will be websites that suit to different tastes, like the quality newspapers versus the tabloids among the print media. In the meantime, we have to be aware that trash and treasure are mixed. We (all of us) have tolerated to trash without doing much to help improve the quality of discussion.
I am sympathetic to Andrew and Nich for their efforts to improve the quality of NM. [I myself stop visiting NM some time ago for not wanting to waste time reading irresponsible posting. Thanks a friend who alert me of this topic; otherwise I wouldn’t have looked at NM now]. I disagree with criticism that editorial intervention equals “elitism” or a divine power from above. They are trying to do what other editors do. But it could be counter productive or defeat the characteristics of the new media. It might not be the right medicine.
Is there any way for readers to help control and improve the quality? Please help Andrew and Nich think. If we love the open participation of the new media, we should take care of it too, for our shared benefits.
Many suggest that using real names might help improve both the quality and responsibility. I am not sure, but I can understand the reasons. If we agree for now that it might help, how about two parallel sets of comments: one by those who use real names and one by those who don’t? (This would minimize the editor’s intervention as well.)
How about creating an incentive for real names and disincentive for the unnamed — such as reducing the font size of all unnamed comments to the degree of readability but with some efforts, while leaving the named comments to the normal size? Or how about allowing the named comments on the site for longer time than the unnamed comments (that shall be removed after a shorter period)?
Apart from the real name matter, how about a way for readers to vote to “trash” certain comments? E.G. providing a click for “Trash it” at the end of each comment and if x number of voters click it, that comment goes to the bin. The editor may override the votes. Then, the editors would look only those that are trashed to prevent a foul play, instead of having to screeening the quality of all comments.
The social impacts of opium eradication
The report is a good piece. Seen from a distance (of time, law, and many other abstractions), the times of opium cultivation in the hills were pretty good. But the triangulation of ecology, society, and the law is a selective focus. In some areas, impoverished (and addicted?) Karen did a lot of the heavy field work for Lisu and Hmong in the north of Thailand (before the 1970s), and Akha for the Mien in Muong Sing (before the 1960s). While the “society” engaged in the production appears to be thriving (and trade monopolies and taxation do not come into view), the process created or accentuated various kinds of regional (intra- and inter-ethnic) inequalities. The “disappearing” poor laborers (an underclass of sorts) is perhaps comparable to the cross-border Shan who do the heavy agricultural work for the communities that are supposedly benefitting from the Royal Project in the north of Thailand.
New Mandala comments policy
To be honest, I am not sure how this will work. How can one be sure of blog quality? Is the basic idea to make it academic rather than political? I personally like the idea of quick commenting. If I want to write an academic paper I have other outlets. Actually, a couple of days ago, I spent sometime writing a comment – actually attacking two other commentators, but in a reasonably polite way, suggesting a bunch of references on vote-buying. However, that has never appeared. If that kind of post, linking to a bunch of comments and to some academic literature is outside the scope of NM, then I am wondering what is acceptable? Or is it that my post just disappeared in cyberspace?
New Mandala comments policy
If it aint broke, don’t fix it. You run the risk of ruining a fairly good forum (much better – freer & more open – than the Pundit club, IMO).
Leave the Bkk politics in – it’s terrific. Keep it all just as is. It’s too late! NM’s character is established. “Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained.” O.K, so slap ranters like Republican over the wrists (I’m talking about his long, boring, repetitive series of a few months ago) with a wrist-slapping warning-post. But please don’t get into censorship.
Srithanonchai #5, I do agree with your final paragraph, but can’t entirely agree with the ‘letters to the editor’ idea: it’s a new & different medium, and NM allows for real (extended) discussion, in a way that newspapers (& many blog-sites) don’t – even though some participants are not as well informed as others. Look at some of the longer threads. They’ve gone through boring patches & suddenly sparked back into life. And dialogues like that between Teth and Sidh – where else would we see stuff like that? (Where are they now BTW?) NM is good, when it’s good, and productive, ditto, and has sometimes produced exceptional stuff out of non-academics as well as from collisions of academics with non-academics, by accident as it were, because it’s been loose.
“Based on past experience, comments which carry a real name will generally be more likely to satisfy our evolving criteria………… Thank you for your patience as this new system is trialled over the coming weeks. We hope that our large and growing readership finds it a beneficial change.” Bloody hell! Here’s a little exercise for you: Read those 2 paragraphs aloud in a falsetto voice.
If it aint broke, don’t fix it!
New Mandala comments policy
You want me to live my real name and discuss issues like Thai Politics and Human Rights? Sorry, I value my life and freedom, so as always no real Name.
New Mandala comments policy
Little Piranha Fish: “Why not leave issues like PAD Vs DAAD to Bangkok Pundit and so free yourself up to deal with those other far more interesting regional issues with which you deal so well?”
What a wonderful idea. For three years I have been pulling articles out of the newspaper I work for, explaining vocabulary, and sometimes writing close-ended and open-ended questions, and it always struck me how the diverse range of English language newspaper articles in Thailand, particularly that get down to the details of how the Thai economy operates and functions, are considered unworthy of blogging, whereas the more contentious in-the-news political stuff, always was.
Last year the big economic issue was exporters fretting about currency appreciation, this year it has been escalating food and oil prices, LPG and other subsidies, as well as central bank independence and the laws that the cou-appointed legislature passed so hurriedly, especially the broadcasting liberalisation bill.
Contentious political issues are guaranteed to generate semi-rational responses as they do on top academic blogs like Brad De-Long’s economics blog at UC Berkeley. Brad De-Long once likened what happens in his comments section to a food fight.
New Mandala comments policy
It is perhaps worth noting that the quality of replies is far superior on topics that do not dwell on the current Thai political stalemate. Just a suggestion. Why not leave issues like PAD Vs DAAD to Bangkok Pundit and so free yourself up to deal with those other far more interesting regional issues with which you deal so well? Frankly, punditry on mainstream Thai politics is a completely unproductive waste of time. More issues on real rural people would help, as they are far more interesting than the likes of Newin ‘Boring’ Chidchob, ‘Im Indoors or Bangkok’s middle-class class.
New Mandala comments policy
Having a bias towards comments using a real name is going to give you a bias towards comments that favor the government in places where people have a realistic fear of the consequences of open speech.
I would have to stop commenting on Thailand because do say what I want to say using my real name would be too dangerous to be worthwhile. Anonymity is not evil.
Oh well. At least there is Bangkok Pundit.
The Stilwell Road
The long discussion on the a Cambridge team sounds interesting nothwithstanding the varied opinions that came through.As a scholar interested in events of the Second World War in North East India, I would be glad if the trip materialises and we get photographs of graves of unknown Indians both civilians and army men.
Beyond the stereotypes of Thailand’s “Reds”
Why is it that in discussion groups such as this one – many seems to be hell-bent on trying to win points on how smart I am – I know more than you and my opinion is the only one worth considering because “I know”.
What I know is, that at the end of the day the Thai people will settle their problem in their own way, whether to the satisfaction of outsiders is irrelevent as it is solely their business . In addition, the opinion of non-Thais on what the Thai people should or shouldn’t do is about as useful as t*ts on a bull – why waste time writting pages of pointless analysis on whether the “reds” are better / worse than the “yellows”, PAD is better than PPP etc. – who cares, certainly not the people of Thailand who are the ones directly involved in this current situation.
New Mandala comments policy
Just yesterday, I had a long talk with a professor from Germany. New Mandala also came up. He complained that most comments were clearly sub-standard, on which I argued that the core importance of NM were its posts and the large readership, not necessarily its comments.
However, I had to agree with him that most comments had become like letters to the editor of a newspaper, that is, not very tempting to respond on, but still a legitimate way of expressing opinions. And you simply cannot expect that such letters, or comments to New Mandala, are mostly written by people who intellectually are at a similarly high level as seem to be the standard of post-docs or research fellows at RSPAS.
If you are really serious with your criteria, hardly any of the more frequent commentators on New Mandala will ever again see their comments appear on this blog.