The generic term “deforestation” is used so ambiguously that it is virtually meaningless as a description of land-use change. . . . It is our contention that the use of the term “deforestation” must be discontinued if scientists, forest land managers, government planners and environmentalists are to have meaningful dialogue on the various human activities that affect forests and the biophysical consequences of those actions.
What the quote is indicating is that there is enormous diversity in land-cover change and that this diversity is obscured by emotive and blanket terms like deforestation.
So to ask someone what their position is on deforestation is a bit meaningless. It depends.
Whether or not a particular form of landcover change is desirable or undesirable will depend on a wide range of locally specific factors. Decisions should be informed by open-minded science and locally grounded research not by simplified narratives of environmental crisis.
And, yes, of course farmers in the region have a wide range of practices aimed at various forms of environmental protection. We describe some of them in our book.
practices to encourage water to soak into agricultural soils. But what about non-agricultural soils? Or is farming the only importance? Do these farmers care about what they don’t cultivate for currency? You’ve argued strongly that the farmers care about voting and politics, so I should trust that they are equally concerned with the environment that is not financially beneficial to them.
very intresting story. but I wonder the land included in these test are lande that cultvated р╕Юр╕╖р╕Кр╣Др╕гр╣И or р╕Юр╕╖р╕Кр╕кр╕зр╕Щ cuz I’ve heard lot that land growing р╕Юр╕╖р╕Кр╣Др╕гр╣И will be less moisture than the latter.
I find it impossible to place my trust on a government that is willing to support the murder of more than 2500 of its own citizens just for a marketing stunt . If they can go as far as that, then it is not difficult to imagine them capable of much worst once they manage to consolidate even more power, tighten up media control, and subvert further the already weakened checks and balances. They had already gone far down the authoritarian path with no indication (nor would there be any incentive) of reversing course.
If the government kills its own citizens extrajudically, then let it be removed by extrajudicial/ extraconstitutional means if that be the only avenue available. Such illegitimate government which is manifestly lacking even the most basic morals must be stopped from amassing further power which would not only enable but surely encourage it to commit greater abuses on its own citizens due to impunity.
I would agree with Kuson that the lastest developments in Thailand shows a glimmer of light, especially in that we will hopefully not need a coup to halt government abuse and make it more accountable for its actions (which by the way, the PPP government had already announced that the second phase of war on drugs is in the pipelines, with Chalerm having advertised an expected 3000 – 4000 body count, while PM Samak said “I will not set a target for how many people should die”.)
As for the PAD, while I have my reservations for the group’s leaders due to some of their extreme views I have heard, I fully admire the PAD protesters who turn out in the tens of thousands to join the protests. To have the courage to act on their moral convictions and to endure the difficulties (days on end out in the burning sunshine, heavy rain, sitting/sleeping on hard cement surfaces for extended periods, etc) and not to mention the psychological tension which must have often arisen due to the fear from violence breaking out on various occasions.
So despite various PAD viewpoints I don’t agree with, I still wholeheartedly give them my full support. Perhaps some of that support is out of guilt since I am the lazy one who is not yet ready to make the real sacrifices, and just hoping to have the free ride to a better and more accountable government for our country.
And Thailand can take the example of Burma in successful interdiction of military in politic and appointed representative.
With the new system, the military would never, ever interfere with politic a tad more than necessary. Never have an influence and nephotism in appointing successor, nor abuse their power for personal benefit.
The appointed representative would do an enlighten job of managing the country. No single family or clan would benefit from monopoly tie to any industry. Any problem to the glorious road of development are cause by evil foreigner, and any so-call “educated people” with any view deviate from the enlighten manifesto would be righteously correct in camp S-21.
Thailand could have a new beginning of Year Zero!
I wonder if the increase in the price of salt will have any impact on Alan Rabinowitz’s conservation work north of Putao, since it includes providing salt to the locals in hopes of cutting down on market hunting.
Sidh: “I’d like to take the opportunity to acknowledge the real Thais who are ” doing some things right” according to Andrew – I would argue that they have done MANY things right, not just some.”
I agree completely. I began my life in Thailand in rural Thailand near the border area and came to believe that everything was messed up (drugs, AIDS, greed, gemstones).
Then I moved to Chiang Rai, and things were more orderly, idyllic even, the old airport being a health park that everyone converges to in the evening for bicycling, badminton, or just to walk the dog. People have a healthy attitude to education and fitness, even more so than in the states where I come from. Then later, at night there is the night bazaar a healthy place where families or young people can go for some entertainment together. There’s also a vibrant art scene and a French culture center. And all you need is a little Honda Dream motorcycle to get around town. You can even put your Shihtzu in the front basket, where she will sit proudly until you reach the restaurant where she can even eat with you (not off the same plate).
Then for better and more challenging work I moved to Bangkok. Even though it is a lot more expensive (you really need a car which I don’t have) people have a more cosmopolitan and informed view of where the country needs to go, and are extremely open to influence from the west, perhaps too much so, that I feel is what causes the occasional nationalist backlash or concerns with khwaam-ben-Thai.
Anyway, like Tarissa governor of the Bank of Thailand said, Thailand has a diversified economy that will protect it from outside shocks, self-sufficiency is part of that, and also a diversified hybrid culture, wattanatham-krung, just like luk-krung, that will protect it from cultural extremes, both foreign and domestic. Thailand is as good as it gets.
For PAD’s vision to be realized, a coup is needed. Fortunately the army is not up for it (it could be different if GenSaprang was army chief and not GenAnupong – is this by chance or through cold calculation?).
Anyway, here’s a link to a Manager article on the intellectual rationale behind the ideas:
I think 16x Million Baht / 70 houses = 2.x million thb per house is too simplistic and dangerous to conclude — i.e. Jumping to Conclusions.
Perhaps there’s infrastructure costs (roads, pipelines, electricity)? Perhaps 70 houses is only part of the bigger plan? Perhaps Soldiers there to guard the construction workers? The houses are built of inexpensive materials (at least the image) — there’s no way that they add up to 2.x million per house, so possibility that it is part of larger plan.
Lots of information here is not given, so its better not to conclude.
But yes, I do agree that eventually if it were to demonstrate Sustainability, it must be able to sustain itself, with lowest energy consumption and highest utility for the baht, with all the necessary ecosystem, and hopefully also simplistic beauty designed in. If the idea is genuine, it could be like the “100 dollar laptop for children” – something worth investing in.
What I hope is, it is the “Raw Seed” that will be refined eventually to make it reality.
Ideally perhaps eventually it will be a “100 dollar home, with brick mud and some sort of inexpensive roofing”, plus a communal tv (5 tv sets, one tuned to each of the Thai Channel, so people don’t fight over the remote control) and a footsal dirt football so the community can be formed (community should share the resources quite well), including security services. I think these are the next steps — Sustainable Communities & Best Practices 🙂
Kuson, yes, I agree with PAD’s merits (the most effective counterbalance to TRT/PPP gangster mobs – and the political activism is certainly refreshing in the traditionally passive society) – and understand their royalist/nationalist narrative (effective communication as you say) but recently their leadership has been advocating democratically questionable political change (e.g. the 30% elected and 70% selected MP). I personally don’t take it seriously – as it is not possible without, exactly what you fear, a coup. In fact, it is another thing I don’t agree with PAD, calling on the armed forces to (again) take sides against the government. See:
But it does show that GenSonthi’s (and assuming also PMSurayud’s) decision to hand the army chief position to GenAnupong rather than GenSaprang is a carefully calculated decision. I think GenAnupong’s general cool is a blessing in this very hot political climate…
I do not wish (nor am I qualified) to comment on whether farmers are unfairly blamed for causing hydrological problems when they clear forested areas for agriculture, but I would be interested to hear whether you are merely defending the farmers against what in y0ur view is unfair criticism, or are you advocating for more deforestation?
Stephen: “…we can’t assume that just any economic investment will necessarily be beneficial to the people nor that just any economic opportunity for those above will necessarily lead to economic opportunity for those below. I think it’s rather limiting to suggest that the only two possibilities are exploitive, unregulated industry and absolute isolation.”
Who is going to regulate Burmese industry? The west? Not likely that they will be given a chance.
NGOs are the least likely source, even Thaksin argued, I believe, that NGOs involve loss of sovereignty.
The best way to create transparent situations without exploitation is engagement and under the gaze of transparency and with suitable public participation things gradually change. Regulation in the Thai economy is like this.
That no one shall travel to or engage in commerce or investment with Burma, as activists have suggested, is the best way not to engage, not to create economic opportunities for Burmese, not to create transparency, not to know what is actually going on, and not to have any means of changing bad things when they happen.
If the west had engaged early on with Burma, there would be other opportunities, now there is not.
Given that the west has effectively economically isolated Burma, the Burmese use what limited opportunities they have. I personally knew business people when I lived in Burma. One textile mill manager, for instance, systematically changed the labels on shirts so they could not be traced to Burma, this mill employed hundreds.
Stephen: “Any economic opportunity for those above will necessarily lead to economic opportunity for those below.”
Capital accumulation from above is a fact of life, acknowledged, for instance in the Pasuk essay on rent seeking in the recent Thai Capital volume.
I suggest that you study 20th economic history in a little bit more depth. Contention between labour and capital is likely an unavoidable part of building a modernised economy with no easy way out. South Korea, for instance, at several crucial economic transition points, clamped down on wages, so labourers were effectively helping to subsidize the cheap exports that drove economic development. (Bruce and Meredith Woo Cumings work on the Korean development is great).
[Furthermore, regarding my comments in general, they reflect the way many of the Burmese I have known and lived with think, but opinions that are usually drowned out by the party line, for example, protest by not travelling to Burma. Why do people not voice opposing opinions? Because they are afraid of being ostracized and labelled. Western scholarship which is supposed to encourage a multiplicity of views and debate, in theory, in practice is quite autocratic and monovocal as far as Burma is concerned. I simply do not care whether I am ostracized or labeled, I will continue to provide an alternative viewpoint to the party line]
Straightaway, in the very first article, one finds a well-balanced article full of background and history on the Assets Scrutiny Committee (ASC).
I’m surprised New Mandala hasn’t covered Chang Noi’s recent column on the Thai legal system, which many people find insightful:
When elephants fight, the law books get trampled underfoot
23 june 2008
Re removal of King: you miss my point, showing your lack of lucidity. The King may be inviolate but there is no rule in the constitution that says the incumbent can only be removed from the role of monarch via a plebiscite (in fact I believe the constitution is complete silent on this). … I’m amazed you’d go the referendum route, risking the vote going the other way, when other avenues (which I loosely called judicial) were available.
Since this is pure imaginary scenario from the begining, the issue of whether there’s any provision in the constitution is irrevant.
But yes, a change of this magnitude definitely would require a great consensus of the poplution which can in no way obtained except through popular referendum (a kind of elctions). So the fact that you can even think that such scenario could be used against my arguments in favor of elections show how, pardon my repeat, thoughtLESS you are.
What’s wrong with this kind of argument? and why I regard it as irrelevant to my argument?
“If a criminal act (regardless of the perceived morality of its intended outcomes) wins popular approval, does it become less criminal?”
WHO ARE YOU to insist that certain actions – or, as I’d prefer, Public Policy – is “criminal act”?
Your premise assumes that you’re GOD that every one MUST consider that action “criminal” as you do.
Since I won’t be crazy enough to accept your premise, the rest is irrelevant.
The so-called War on Drug is very popular. I never say it’s right or good. But if you consider it “criminal”, by all means campaign for changes e.g. (as I suggest above) elect new parliament, new gov that would enact new policy, new regulations, etc.
(p.s. this applied to #36 too: who are you to consider what action / policy constitutes “oppression..etc.” as mentioned in the founding fathers’ documents?
Say Party Z campaigned in an election (NOT a referendum) on a policy to exterminate all persons born on Saturdays, and distribute their estate/belongings to the rest of the population.
This again shows, well, your stupidity. Do any elections law, not to speak of the Constitution, allow such silly scenario (“eliminate all persons…)? Did I EVER say or imply that “elections” of any kind whatsoever? North Korea has elections too, so does Cuba and all former Communist states. Was there anywhere in my discussion that implies I includes all these?
About the US and all those war. Again this shows how, well, thoughtless you are. The American State is party to all the International Laws and Conventions that prevent such things as the conduct of the Vietnam War and many of the subsequences ones (this is my opinion of course that these wars constitute violation).
So it’s not simply the protection of domestic nationals that presidents, etc. are subjected to by law. You Silly!
(Actually, even US domestic law, as I undertand it, there are provisions that could be interpreted as criminal the conducts of those wars.)
Moe Aung, I share your lack of optimism for a massive improvement in the situation during the short term. However, I think that as you pointed out about “the cyclone survivors pulling through against the odds,” there are daily victories in the ‘everyday resistance’ of so many pyithu-ludu which often go unnoticed by outside observers. As Don pointed out, the people of Burma have a persistent ability to surmount the obastacles they face on a daily basis. For those of us who are emotionally involved acknowledging these small successes in people’s resistance to abusive implementation of State policies and and in their evasion of military restrictions can provide some succour to the frustration of seeing a bloated military elite profit from its violent exploitation of the population.
Regime change, I’d rather call a spade a spade, is what the people will achieve when the conditions are ripe.
Rumours abound about political uprisings and astrology and I’ve heard many about August 8th, 2008 with the 20th anniversary of 8888, the start of the Beijing Olympics and (I’m not clear on this point) some lunar phenomenon in August which hasn’t happened since August 1988. However, I suspect that the SPDC is likewise aware of the symbolism of this date and so, although I suspect we’ll see some localised protests in August I have my doubts about conditions being sufficiently ‘ripe’ at that time. But I am even less a fortune teller than I am a policy maker so I will follow the news with earnestness.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Rain, forest, soil, river
Thanks for the quick response, I’ll buy your book. I thought after I commented that the word ‘deforestation’ was a bit ambiguous.
More forest mythology
Well, glad that has all been cleared up now.
Problem ‘closed’.
Rain, forest, soil, river
I will respond with a passage from Hamilton and Pearce that we quote on pages 11-12 of Forest Guardians Forest Destroyers:
What the quote is indicating is that there is enormous diversity in land-cover change and that this diversity is obscured by emotive and blanket terms like deforestation.
So to ask someone what their position is on deforestation is a bit meaningless. It depends.
Whether or not a particular form of landcover change is desirable or undesirable will depend on a wide range of locally specific factors. Decisions should be informed by open-minded science and locally grounded research not by simplified narratives of environmental crisis.
And, yes, of course farmers in the region have a wide range of practices aimed at various forms of environmental protection. We describe some of them in our book.
Sufficiency design principles
Loveg live The Queen !
Rain, forest, soil, river
Yes I agree with nganadeeleg, your argument allows for logging advocates to add further justification to their position.. I am reminded of this: http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/2008/06/20/nam-theun-resettlement-an-entirely-predictable-stuff-up/
What is your position on deforestation?
practices to encourage water to soak into agricultural soils. But what about non-agricultural soils? Or is farming the only importance? Do these farmers care about what they don’t cultivate for currency? You’ve argued strongly that the farmers care about voting and politics, so I should trust that they are equally concerned with the environment that is not financially beneficial to them.
Rain, forest, soil, river
very intresting story. but I wonder the land included in these test are lande that cultvated р╕Юр╕╖р╕Кр╣Др╕гр╣И or р╕Юр╕╖р╕Кр╕кр╕зр╕Щ cuz I’ve heard lot that land growing р╕Юр╕╖р╕Кр╣Др╕гр╣И will be less moisture than the latter.
Time to go home
Re #13
I gave my support for the Sept 2006 coup.
I find it impossible to place my trust on a government that is willing to support the murder of more than 2500 of its own citizens just for a marketing stunt . If they can go as far as that, then it is not difficult to imagine them capable of much worst once they manage to consolidate even more power, tighten up media control, and subvert further the already weakened checks and balances. They had already gone far down the authoritarian path with no indication (nor would there be any incentive) of reversing course.
If the government kills its own citizens extrajudically, then let it be removed by extrajudicial/ extraconstitutional means if that be the only avenue available. Such illegitimate government which is manifestly lacking even the most basic morals must be stopped from amassing further power which would not only enable but surely encourage it to commit greater abuses on its own citizens due to impunity.
I would agree with Kuson that the lastest developments in Thailand shows a glimmer of light, especially in that we will hopefully not need a coup to halt government abuse and make it more accountable for its actions (which by the way, the PPP government had already announced that the second phase of war on drugs is in the pipelines, with Chalerm having advertised an expected 3000 – 4000 body count, while PM Samak said “I will not set a target for how many people should die”.)
As for the PAD, while I have my reservations for the group’s leaders due to some of their extreme views I have heard, I fully admire the PAD protesters who turn out in the tens of thousands to join the protests. To have the courage to act on their moral convictions and to endure the difficulties (days on end out in the burning sunshine, heavy rain, sitting/sleeping on hard cement surfaces for extended periods, etc) and not to mention the psychological tension which must have often arisen due to the fear from violence breaking out on various occasions.
So despite various PAD viewpoints I don’t agree with, I still wholeheartedly give them my full support. Perhaps some of that support is out of guilt since I am the lazy one who is not yet ready to make the real sacrifices, and just hoping to have the free ride to a better and more accountable government for our country.
PA(S)D and a political revolution
And Thailand can take the example of Burma in successful interdiction of military in politic and appointed representative.
With the new system, the military would never, ever interfere with politic a tad more than necessary. Never have an influence and nephotism in appointing successor, nor abuse their power for personal benefit.
The appointed representative would do an enlighten job of managing the country. No single family or clan would benefit from monopoly tie to any industry. Any problem to the glorious road of development are cause by evil foreigner, and any so-call “educated people” with any view deviate from the enlighten manifesto would be righteously correct in camp S-21.
Thailand could have a new beginning of Year Zero!
The price of salt in Myanmar
I wonder if the increase in the price of salt will have any impact on Alan Rabinowitz’s conservation work north of Putao, since it includes providing salt to the locals in hopes of cutting down on market hunting.
The Thai state: doing some things right
Sidh: “I’d like to take the opportunity to acknowledge the real Thais who are ” doing some things right” according to Andrew – I would argue that they have done MANY things right, not just some.”
I agree completely. I began my life in Thailand in rural Thailand near the border area and came to believe that everything was messed up (drugs, AIDS, greed, gemstones).
Then I moved to Chiang Rai, and things were more orderly, idyllic even, the old airport being a health park that everyone converges to in the evening for bicycling, badminton, or just to walk the dog. People have a healthy attitude to education and fitness, even more so than in the states where I come from. Then later, at night there is the night bazaar a healthy place where families or young people can go for some entertainment together. There’s also a vibrant art scene and a French culture center. And all you need is a little Honda Dream motorcycle to get around town. You can even put your Shihtzu in the front basket, where she will sit proudly until you reach the restaurant where she can even eat with you (not off the same plate).
Then for better and more challenging work I moved to Bangkok. Even though it is a lot more expensive (you really need a car which I don’t have) people have a more cosmopolitan and informed view of where the country needs to go, and are extremely open to influence from the west, perhaps too much so, that I feel is what causes the occasional nationalist backlash or concerns with khwaam-ben-Thai.
Anyway, like Tarissa governor of the Bank of Thailand said, Thailand has a diversified economy that will protect it from outside shocks, self-sufficiency is part of that, and also a diversified hybrid culture, wattanatham-krung, just like luk-krung, that will protect it from cultural extremes, both foreign and domestic. Thailand is as good as it gets.
Sufficiency design principles
dirt football above means “dirt football field”
PA(S)D and a political revolution
For PAD’s vision to be realized, a coup is needed. Fortunately the army is not up for it (it could be different if GenSaprang was army chief and not GenAnupong – is this by chance or through cold calculation?).
Anyway, here’s a link to a Manager article on the intellectual rationale behind the ideas:
‘р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╣Гр╕лр╕бр╣И’ = р╕Юр╕лр╕╕р╕Щр╕┤р╕вр╕б + р╕нр╕▒р╕Ир╕Хр╕зр╕▓р╕Щр╕╕р╕ар╕▓р╕Ю ?! in
http://www.manager.co.th/Daily/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000079693
This in turn has links to:
р╕Юр╕ер╕зр╕▒р╕Хр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╣Др╕Чр╕в (Dynamics of Thai Politics)
http://www.kpi2.org/kpith/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=9
and:
р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕▓р╕Шр╕┤р╕Ыр╣Др╕Хр╕вр╕Юр╕лр╕╕р╕нр╕│р╕Щр╕▓р╕И р╣Др╕Ыр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Юр╣Йр╕Щр╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╣Бр╕Ър╕Ър╕Бр╕┤р╕Щр╕гр╕зр╕Ъ- р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕зр╕и р╕зр╕░р╕кр╕╡
http://www.midnightuniv.org/forum/index.php?topic=6211.0
Sufficiency design principles
I think 16x Million Baht / 70 houses = 2.x million thb per house is too simplistic and dangerous to conclude — i.e. Jumping to Conclusions.
Perhaps there’s infrastructure costs (roads, pipelines, electricity)? Perhaps 70 houses is only part of the bigger plan? Perhaps Soldiers there to guard the construction workers? The houses are built of inexpensive materials (at least the image) — there’s no way that they add up to 2.x million per house, so possibility that it is part of larger plan.
Lots of information here is not given, so its better not to conclude.
But yes, I do agree that eventually if it were to demonstrate Sustainability, it must be able to sustain itself, with lowest energy consumption and highest utility for the baht, with all the necessary ecosystem, and hopefully also simplistic beauty designed in. If the idea is genuine, it could be like the “100 dollar laptop for children” – something worth investing in.
What I hope is, it is the “Raw Seed” that will be refined eventually to make it reality.
Ideally perhaps eventually it will be a “100 dollar home, with brick mud and some sort of inexpensive roofing”, plus a communal tv (5 tv sets, one tuned to each of the Thai Channel, so people don’t fight over the remote control) and a footsal dirt football so the community can be formed (community should share the resources quite well), including security services. I think these are the next steps — Sustainable Communities & Best Practices 🙂
Time to go home
Kuson, yes, I agree with PAD’s merits (the most effective counterbalance to TRT/PPP gangster mobs – and the political activism is certainly refreshing in the traditionally passive society) – and understand their royalist/nationalist narrative (effective communication as you say) but recently their leadership has been advocating democratically questionable political change (e.g. the 30% elected and 70% selected MP). I personally don’t take it seriously – as it is not possible without, exactly what you fear, a coup. In fact, it is another thing I don’t agree with PAD, calling on the armed forces to (again) take sides against the government. See:
“Army leader criticises the PAD, vows to stay neutral”
http://www.bangkokpost.net/080708_News/08Jul2008_news06.php
But it does show that GenSonthi’s (and assuming also PMSurayud’s) decision to hand the army chief position to GenAnupong rather than GenSaprang is a carefully calculated decision. I think GenAnupong’s general cool is a blessing in this very hot political climate…
Rain, forest, soil, river
I do not wish (nor am I qualified) to comment on whether farmers are unfairly blamed for causing hydrological problems when they clear forested areas for agriculture, but I would be interested to hear whether you are merely defending the farmers against what in y0ur view is unfair criticism, or are you advocating for more deforestation?
Ashley South on post-cyclone Burma
Stephen: “…we can’t assume that just any economic investment will necessarily be beneficial to the people nor that just any economic opportunity for those above will necessarily lead to economic opportunity for those below. I think it’s rather limiting to suggest that the only two possibilities are exploitive, unregulated industry and absolute isolation.”
Who is going to regulate Burmese industry? The west? Not likely that they will be given a chance.
NGOs are the least likely source, even Thaksin argued, I believe, that NGOs involve loss of sovereignty.
The best way to create transparent situations without exploitation is engagement and under the gaze of transparency and with suitable public participation things gradually change. Regulation in the Thai economy is like this.
That no one shall travel to or engage in commerce or investment with Burma, as activists have suggested, is the best way not to engage, not to create economic opportunities for Burmese, not to create transparency, not to know what is actually going on, and not to have any means of changing bad things when they happen.
If the west had engaged early on with Burma, there would be other opportunities, now there is not.
Given that the west has effectively economically isolated Burma, the Burmese use what limited opportunities they have. I personally knew business people when I lived in Burma. One textile mill manager, for instance, systematically changed the labels on shirts so they could not be traced to Burma, this mill employed hundreds.
Stephen: “Any economic opportunity for those above will necessarily lead to economic opportunity for those below.”
Capital accumulation from above is a fact of life, acknowledged, for instance in the Pasuk essay on rent seeking in the recent Thai Capital volume.
I suggest that you study 20th economic history in a little bit more depth. Contention between labour and capital is likely an unavoidable part of building a modernised economy with no easy way out. South Korea, for instance, at several crucial economic transition points, clamped down on wages, so labourers were effectively helping to subsidize the cheap exports that drove economic development. (Bruce and Meredith Woo Cumings work on the Korean development is great).
[Furthermore, regarding my comments in general, they reflect the way many of the Burmese I have known and lived with think, but opinions that are usually drowned out by the party line, for example, protest by not travelling to Burma. Why do people not voice opposing opinions? Because they are afraid of being ostracized and labelled. Western scholarship which is supposed to encourage a multiplicity of views and debate, in theory, in practice is quite autocratic and monovocal as far as Burma is concerned. I simply do not care whether I am ostracized or labeled, I will continue to provide an alternative viewpoint to the party line]
PA(S)D and a political revolution
Also thanks for pointing to Michael Connors blog.
Straightaway, in the very first article, one finds a well-balanced article full of background and history on the Assets Scrutiny Committee (ASC).
I’m surprised New Mandala hasn’t covered Chang Noi’s recent column on the Thai legal system, which many people find insightful:
When elephants fight, the law books get trampled underfoot
23 june 2008
http://www.geocities.com/changnoi2/trampled.htm
Ji Ungpakorn on the “carnival of reaction”
Re removal of King: you miss my point, showing your lack of lucidity. The King may be inviolate but there is no rule in the constitution that says the incumbent can only be removed from the role of monarch via a plebiscite (in fact I believe the constitution is complete silent on this). … I’m amazed you’d go the referendum route, risking the vote going the other way, when other avenues (which I loosely called judicial) were available.
Since this is pure imaginary scenario from the begining, the issue of whether there’s any provision in the constitution is irrevant.
But yes, a change of this magnitude definitely would require a great consensus of the poplution which can in no way obtained except through popular referendum (a kind of elctions). So the fact that you can even think that such scenario could be used against my arguments in favor of elections show how, pardon my repeat, thoughtLESS you are.
Ji Ungpakorn on the “carnival of reaction”
What’s wrong with this kind of argument? and why I regard it as irrelevant to my argument?
“If a criminal act (regardless of the perceived morality of its intended outcomes) wins popular approval, does it become less criminal?”
WHO ARE YOU to insist that certain actions – or, as I’d prefer, Public Policy – is “criminal act”?
Your premise assumes that you’re GOD that every one MUST consider that action “criminal” as you do.
Since I won’t be crazy enough to accept your premise, the rest is irrelevant.
The so-called War on Drug is very popular. I never say it’s right or good. But if you consider it “criminal”, by all means campaign for changes e.g. (as I suggest above) elect new parliament, new gov that would enact new policy, new regulations, etc.
(p.s. this applied to #36 too: who are you to consider what action / policy constitutes “oppression..etc.” as mentioned in the founding fathers’ documents?
Say Party Z campaigned in an election (NOT a referendum) on a policy to exterminate all persons born on Saturdays, and distribute their estate/belongings to the rest of the population.
This again shows, well, your stupidity. Do any elections law, not to speak of the Constitution, allow such silly scenario (“eliminate all persons…)? Did I EVER say or imply that “elections” of any kind whatsoever? North Korea has elections too, so does Cuba and all former Communist states. Was there anywhere in my discussion that implies I includes all these?
About the US and all those war. Again this shows how, well, thoughtless you are. The American State is party to all the International Laws and Conventions that prevent such things as the conduct of the Vietnam War and many of the subsequences ones (this is my opinion of course that these wars constitute violation).
So it’s not simply the protection of domestic nationals that presidents, etc. are subjected to by law. You Silly!
(Actually, even US domestic law, as I undertand it, there are provisions that could be interpreted as criminal the conducts of those wars.)
Ashley South on post-cyclone Burma
Moe Aung, I share your lack of optimism for a massive improvement in the situation during the short term. However, I think that as you pointed out about “the cyclone survivors pulling through against the odds,” there are daily victories in the ‘everyday resistance’ of so many pyithu-ludu which often go unnoticed by outside observers. As Don pointed out, the people of Burma have a persistent ability to surmount the obastacles they face on a daily basis. For those of us who are emotionally involved acknowledging these small successes in people’s resistance to abusive implementation of State policies and and in their evasion of military restrictions can provide some succour to the frustration of seeing a bloated military elite profit from its violent exploitation of the population.
Rumours abound about political uprisings and astrology and I’ve heard many about August 8th, 2008 with the 20th anniversary of 8888, the start of the Beijing Olympics and (I’m not clear on this point) some lunar phenomenon in August which hasn’t happened since August 1988. However, I suspect that the SPDC is likewise aware of the symbolism of this date and so, although I suspect we’ll see some localised protests in August I have my doubts about conditions being sufficiently ‘ripe’ at that time. But I am even less a fortune teller than I am a policy maker so I will follow the news with earnestness.