Sidh: You commit a grave injustice and to those associated with the events of 1973, 1976 and 1992, and especially those families who suffered terrible losses. On your question – yes, I do.
Your system is too complicated to calculate and easy to cheat. They just need to forge a few degree paper which we have a case even among our (honor) Parliament members.
Just go back to Absolute Monarchy and nobody will dare oppose that idea, less one or two.
Jon, it’s sad to hear what is basically a counsel of despair. I do accept China’s role in propping up the junta and Western reluctance in dealing with the emerging superpower in the East, their lack of interest and low priority, geopolitics and all that.
Cambodia’s Pol Pot regime was brought down by Vietnam, not the US. You have conveniently forgotten the South Korean people’s own struggle culminating in the Resistance of June 1987 which proved to be the beginning of the end for totalitarian rule. Again in Indonesia in 1998, it was internal contradictions in the ruling junta and popular struggle and protest that brought down Suharto. Eurocentric thinking is a common affliction in a Western dominated world, both East and West.
I don’t wish to repeat the importance of Burma’s neighbours in refusing to isolate the junta. If there is the political will the generals can import any amount of goods, services and technology for the public, not just to enrich themselves, their families and their cronies. There just isn’t. They have always gone abroad to receive medical treatment for themselves and for their families, not to mention shopping. The ridiculous prices of old used cars and cell phones in Burma are good examples of man-made distortions and aberrations. It’s not because of isolation, it’s because of the generals. So here I repeat it’s the generals that keep the country down, not outsiders despite their cockups and cackhanded approach.
Thanks for the citation. I realize sources cannot always be named, but when they can it adds a lot of credibility and broadens the scope of the debate.
Be careful with that beer in this heat — you don’t want to fall asleep and miss a posting!
Sortition or election by lottery is actually considered a serious and realistic means of election by some.
The idea of weighting votes by income would be good if the weighting was inverse to a person’s wealth. i.e. poor people’s votes were worth more. The rich already have influence and power and can get what they need anyway.
More power to you Jack.
There was heavy fighting at 5am this morning and there are casualties on both sides.
I am very tired and am now going to sleep.
Keep the faith mate.
Reg Varney, let’s deal with the present injustices first, where evidences still abound, when witnesses are still alive and their memories are still sharp. Taking these critical steps may lead to a higher possibility that past injustices will be addressed at a societal level… Do you think it is possible that Thai, or any society for that matter, can come together and say let’s deal with all past injustices first and present injustices will take care of itself?
Moe Aung: “Jon, it is a common fallacy to believe that things will move only when dominant Western states give it a push…[not a push sustained nonrelenting engagement of a prodigal son…]
“Most of us would agree that constructive engagement by ASEAN has only played into the hands of the junta so far,…. [the junta may be here for a long time to come because of China, may be a fact we just have to accept]
But so long as the class relationship between the rulers and the ruled remains unchanged, and given the manifest intransigence on the part of the junta, a consensus of constructive engagement will prove more beneficial to the junta in recognising its legitimacy and contributing to its coffers.” […and they are likely to be there for a long time, whether we like it or not, geopolitics….]
Moe Aung, there is no real analysis here. There is no comparison with other historical situations and trajectories in other states. With feasible futures and historical trajectories for Burma.
Do you think that other states have not had dictators or authoritarian rulers? The Olympics South Korea 1988 was a big factor in getting rid of the oppressive regime there and this consisted of a major engagement with the outside world.
Since 1962 Burma has hardly made the first step. First, from a policy of isolation that originated within the country, the Burmese Way to Socialism, but also from the country’s strategic unimportance compared to Vietnam. Since 1988 isolation has been a product of western countries not willing to engage with it in any way. There has often not even been an American ambassador, though I was once in the French class at Pyinthi Kyaung on Pyi Lan given by the American ambassador’s wife. I guess that was a form of engagement.
You cannot just say someone has committed a “fallacy.” You must prove it with evidence and argument.
Moe Aung: “…although I freely acknowledge that for some of us economic prosperity may be the end all and be all.”
Prosperity buys medicine, hospitals, and skilled doctors so that your family members do not die like dogs. One critical juncture in my life came when I decided to move my mother in law from a government hospital that couldn’t even diagnose kidney failure and cancer to a private hospital, which eventually consumed every last penny.
The fact that so many people suffer in hospitals is because the economy is not connected up with the outside world, so medicine and knowledge, know how, doesn’t come in. At this stage of the game, the junta is irrelevant. After 40 years it still can’t be displaced and China will ensure that, geopolitically. Tough fact of life.
Thank you Daniel for your positive postings. I was just about to completely give up on this site until I read your commentary.
After reading what the Col. said at dinner, I hope that his name is used less often on this site. I have always kept his info private until I had his permission to pass it along to some one else.
I know I dislike it when people use my name in the open media, so I respect his right to at least choose when and where his name pops up.
We should all try to be a little more respectful of each other, Myself inclueded.
If you see our friend please tell him that the http://www.storminternationalcorp.com site now has a paypal system set up to accept donations for humanitarian aid projects. Also let him know that We spent the last 4 days at a convention for Doctors trying to get aid and medical personnel into his country and area to assist in the clinic and building of a small hopspital. I do not know how effective our efforts were as of yet… only time will tell.
I will be posting less on this site as I have more work for Burma ahead that will require my full and undivided attention.
I would encourage people on this site to be as pro-active as possible. Take care all, Jack Slade
Jon, it is a common fallacy to believe that things will move only when dominant Western states give it a push though understandably widespread among not just Westerners but a lot of the Burmese themselves given the reality of Western powers throwing their weight around so easily these days. It also runs the risk of a dependency culture, expecting either handouts or gunboats at every turn. After all despite globalisation – supposedly new but only new in stage and era – and Western dominance – ever since Vasco da Gama rounded the cape in the first successful attempt at globalisation – we are still dealing with an Eastern land surrounded by Eastern neighbours.
Admittedly a favourable international situation is desirable for domestic struggles to succeed, and on occasion intervention may be a catalyst to trigger change for better or for worse. A decisive and more important factor however is the domestic situation itself when it’s ripe for change. This in turn depends on the balance of forces which here in the case of Burma is overwhelmingly in favour of the regime at this juncture. Just how do you negotiate or reconcile with someone holding a gun to your head?
Don’s and your frustration with the status quo I’m bound to say is merely a fraction of what the peoples of Burma feel. But it doesn’t necessarily mean that the balance cannot change in due course despite such impossible odds. Experts may yet be taken by surprise once again.
Most of us would agree that constructive engagement by ASEAN has only played into the hands of the junta so far, and of course it is a symbiotic relationship between the ruling elites. Granted there is some trickle-down to the populace in terms of economic benefit. Sanctions by the same token deprive the people of this benefit but both the regime and the states concerned also miss out on markets and profits. One group of states throws a lifeline to the regime and another takes a moral stand. Not a complete disaster methinks and both have their use.
But so long as the class relationship between the rulers and the ruled remains unchanged, and given the manifest intransigence on the part of the junta, a consensus of constructive engagement will prove more beneficial to the junta in recognising its legitimacy and contributing to its coffers. India’s change of policy towards Burma competing with China for their mutual neighbour’s resources and strategic and military cooperation is a case in point.
Totalitarian rule and economic prosperity are not mutually exclusive, and have little effect on the class nature of society. We only need to look at China where Communist totalitarian rule can implement capitalist policy so effectively enjoying the absence of checks and balances. Even Singapore is a de facto one-party state. So the risk of this dichotomy between democracy and human rights on one hand and economic development on the other should not be overlooked, although I freely acknowledge that for some of us economic prosperity may be the end all and be all.
One does have to ask–what exactly is meant by the term “constructive engagement?” It has become such a charged term it should in fact be defined for clarity’s sake. What does it mean; what form does it take; and what is or was it supposed to do?
Is it meant to define a policy in which everyone speak softly to the Tatmadaw, essentially give it what it wants and overlook all it does, while hoping for the best over time? Or is it a code word for obtaining beneficial resource deals in return for political cover? Or is it a bit of both, or neither? Several ASEAN countries have stated that constructive engagement was their policy in the 90s. Added to that the fact that other countries were not unified in their approach (Japan has certainly been ambiguous) and that western firms have traded and do trade with Burma, it could be argued that some form of constructive engagement has played itself out, with some countries making friends; others looking for small steps and others for still more. There was some serious talk of a “transition” before Khin Nyunt fell, and a western diplomat in the region told me at the time that policy people were encouraged and not trying to block it. That would seem constructive. But somehow it never came about.
Let us also not forget that the military elite controls a massive amount of funding from its resource deals (if one reads Sean Turrell) yet UN agencies and others have to plead with it in order for those agencies to act as something of a de facto Ministry of Health.
Additionally, to what extent is the accusation of minorities being separatists really true? Whatever some opposition elites and individuals may feel in their heart of hearts, and whatever their policies were in the past, how far is separatism really on the table or considered a serious policy possibility today? The Karen, for example, welcomed students from the cities in 1988 to their territory (the ABSDF have operated on what is effectively Karen or Karenni territory) along with representatives of minority groups, monk groups (the ABYMU) and political opponents of the regime like the NLD (their place was on Aung San Suu Kyi Street) and D.P.N.S. to Manerplaw. No doubt this was a factor in regime attacks there and so had a significant cost. Also, along with periodic negotiation attempts with Rangoon, the Karen have formed or been part of varied umbrella organizations over the years such as the DAB, the NDF, the NCUB and the more recent Ethnic Nationalities Council. It would seem that much of the talk and effort in minority political circles is about a negotiated constitutional federal solution, though for the Tatmadaw, and perhaps for others as well, that is tantamount to destruction of the state.
Moe Aung: Many (most?) people apparently just do not want to accept reality in Burma. That is why they keep proposing ineffective and often counterproductive policies, apparently out of frustration. The point is that no clearcut solution exists, unless you just wipe Burma the way it is off the map and start over. That is not a very practical or humane approach but in essence it seems to be what most of the activists and foreign critics are proposing. Barring that you have to deal with Burma as it is, which means gradual evolutionary change or more of the same stalemated situation, while the Burmese people suffer as much from the actions of outside self appointed do gooders as from their own government. As we have seen following the cyclone, the Burmese people are perfectly capable of acting in their own interest when that is feasible or necessary. But they are there on the spot and as a result most know that the sort of pie in the sky “solutions” proposed by outsiders are not possible under existing circumstances. Not only that, such “solutions” are dangerous and most likely would lead to an even worse situation. Many people in the world, including the Burmese activists in exile, seem to need Burma as a cause for their own purposes and apparently have little concern about the consequences for the Burmese people in the process. For many people Burma has become a caricature rather than a country with real people who have normal everyday needs. This is a sad situation all the way around.
29 June 2008
Correction and apology – too excited from being let outside to go get a beer!
The teacher’s comments were from:
From: http://www.weopenmind.com/board/index.php?topic=6924.msg49452#msg49452
р╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╣Ар╕кр╕▓р╕гр╣М р╕Чр╕╡р╣И 10 р╕Юр╕др╕йр╕ар╕▓р╕Др╕б 2551
‘р╕нр╕вр╣Ир╕▓р╣Ар╕Фр╕┤р╕Щр╣Др╕Ыр╕кр╕╣р╣И 6 р╕Хр╕╕р╕ер╕▓р╕п’ : р╣Ар╕Бр╕йр╕╡р╕вр╕г р╣Ар╕Хр╕Кр╕░р╕Юр╕╡р╕гр╕░
Posted by Canр╣Др╕Чр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕З , р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕нр╣Ир╕▓р╕Щ : 90 , 03:02:13 р╕Щ.
Saturday 10 May 2008
“Don’t Walk Into 6 October
by Kasien Dechaphira
Lese majeste as Thailand’s first major civil liberties test?
Just wondering out loud – Why hasn’t a group gotten together yet to fight this thing in court from the perspective of infringing civil liberties?
I see the originator has written himself. That leaves me off the hook! Actually, I intentionally left out the name and exact source, as well as most of the translation, in part for confidentiality considerations toward the author and in part because I may be using some of that material in a book in draft on Abuse & Consequences of Lese Majeste laws in Thailand.
I have found that there is a heck of a lot of information on the topic, but it takes a great deal of time to look it up, and most of the ‘good’ material is in Thai.
Speaking of which, I am planning to include comments by Thais specifically on lese majeste and what they think about it. Again, unattributed.
I have lived in a Burmese hospital as a member of the family was dieing.
I have used up every penny I had in the world looking after that dieing person.
I have watched Burmese people in that same Rangoon hospital doing exactly the same thing. (Countless others don’t even get as far as a diagnosis.)
Why is this not on television?
Why aren’t there news reports about this?
Why is there never a report on what the sanctions have done to the Burmese people?
Why is every single news report always about the generals, a group of people, that no one can do anything about. After 40 years this is just gratuitous nonsense, by foreigners who want to exhibit their own political correctness at hands length.
>A couple of excerpts from Chotisak’s Thammasart teacher I found interesting but which others may or may not: “If he was still studying with me I would probably rebuke, argue with, censure and warn him but Khun Chotisak has already committed this act….. and Thai lives, flesh and blood are the offerings.”
So, this Thammasart teacher, does he/she have a name? I don’t actually care very much who it is, just wondering if he/she is willing to put things on the line, like Chotisak is. (BTW, most professional news organizations are very reluctant – at least in theory – to print ad hominem comments from anonymous sources, so I’m curious where this is from.)
Maybe I am misreading his/her comments, but it doesn’t look like he/she supports freedom of expression, at least for one particular point of view.
Perhaps the excerpts you didn’t post condemn the PAD, Manager website, et al for “proceeding down the same old path to run into another situation like 6 October 1976 such is now being paved”?
If that’s not the case, I’d say that’s a pretty curious reading of history for a Thammasart acharn. Who is beating the ultra-nationalist drum, after all?
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
“Samak’s government has no ability to shape public opinion”
Sidh: You commit a grave injustice and to those associated with the events of 1973, 1976 and 1992, and especially those families who suffered terrible losses. On your question – yes, I do.
Your chance to shape Thailand’s political future
Your system is too complicated to calculate and easy to cheat. They just need to forge a few degree paper which we have a case even among our (honor) Parliament members.
Just go back to Absolute Monarchy and nobody will dare oppose that idea, less one or two.
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
Jon, it’s sad to hear what is basically a counsel of despair. I do accept China’s role in propping up the junta and Western reluctance in dealing with the emerging superpower in the East, their lack of interest and low priority, geopolitics and all that.
Cambodia’s Pol Pot regime was brought down by Vietnam, not the US. You have conveniently forgotten the South Korean people’s own struggle culminating in the Resistance of June 1987 which proved to be the beginning of the end for totalitarian rule. Again in Indonesia in 1998, it was internal contradictions in the ruling junta and popular struggle and protest that brought down Suharto. Eurocentric thinking is a common affliction in a Western dominated world, both East and West.
I don’t wish to repeat the importance of Burma’s neighbours in refusing to isolate the junta. If there is the political will the generals can import any amount of goods, services and technology for the public, not just to enrich themselves, their families and their cronies. There just isn’t. They have always gone abroad to receive medical treatment for themselves and for their families, not to mention shopping. The ridiculous prices of old used cars and cell phones in Burma are good examples of man-made distortions and aberrations. It’s not because of isolation, it’s because of the generals. So here I repeat it’s the generals that keep the country down, not outsiders despite their cockups and cackhanded approach.
Leave the PA(S)D alone!
>The teacher’s comments were from: http://www.weopenmind.com/board/index.php?topic=6924.msg49452#msg49452
р╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╣Ар╕кр╕▓р╕гр╣М р╕Чр╕╡р╣И 10 р╕Юр╕др╕йр╕ар╕▓р╕Др╕б 2551
Thanks for the citation. I realize sources cannot always be named, but when they can it adds a lot of credibility and broadens the scope of the debate.
Be careful with that beer in this heat — you don’t want to fall asleep and miss a posting!
Your chance to shape Thailand’s political future
Sortition or election by lottery is actually considered a serious and realistic means of election by some.
The idea of weighting votes by income would be good if the weighting was inverse to a person’s wealth. i.e. poor people’s votes were worth more. The rich already have influence and power and can get what they need anyway.
The hydrological hazards of tree planting
[…] is a nice example of the hydrological mythology that often informs discussions of forest in southeast Asia, and elsewhere. This is from a […]
Volunteering to fight in Burma
More power to you Jack.
There was heavy fighting at 5am this morning and there are casualties on both sides.
I am very tired and am now going to sleep.
Keep the faith mate.
“Samak’s government has no ability to shape public opinion”
Reg Varney, let’s deal with the present injustices first, where evidences still abound, when witnesses are still alive and their memories are still sharp. Taking these critical steps may lead to a higher possibility that past injustices will be addressed at a societal level… Do you think it is possible that Thai, or any society for that matter, can come together and say let’s deal with all past injustices first and present injustices will take care of itself?
New Sakdina
[…] have previously proposed a “New Sakdina” system whereby votes would be weighted according to a voters level of […]
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
Moe Aung: “Jon, it is a common fallacy to believe that things will move only when dominant Western states give it a push…[not a push sustained nonrelenting engagement of a prodigal son…]
“Most of us would agree that constructive engagement by ASEAN has only played into the hands of the junta so far,…. [the junta may be here for a long time to come because of China, may be a fact we just have to accept]
But so long as the class relationship between the rulers and the ruled remains unchanged, and given the manifest intransigence on the part of the junta, a consensus of constructive engagement will prove more beneficial to the junta in recognising its legitimacy and contributing to its coffers.” […and they are likely to be there for a long time, whether we like it or not, geopolitics….]
Moe Aung, there is no real analysis here. There is no comparison with other historical situations and trajectories in other states. With feasible futures and historical trajectories for Burma.
Do you think that other states have not had dictators or authoritarian rulers? The Olympics South Korea 1988 was a big factor in getting rid of the oppressive regime there and this consisted of a major engagement with the outside world.
Since 1962 Burma has hardly made the first step. First, from a policy of isolation that originated within the country, the Burmese Way to Socialism, but also from the country’s strategic unimportance compared to Vietnam. Since 1988 isolation has been a product of western countries not willing to engage with it in any way. There has often not even been an American ambassador, though I was once in the French class at Pyinthi Kyaung on Pyi Lan given by the American ambassador’s wife. I guess that was a form of engagement.
You cannot just say someone has committed a “fallacy.” You must prove it with evidence and argument.
Moe Aung: “…although I freely acknowledge that for some of us economic prosperity may be the end all and be all.”
Prosperity buys medicine, hospitals, and skilled doctors so that your family members do not die like dogs. One critical juncture in my life came when I decided to move my mother in law from a government hospital that couldn’t even diagnose kidney failure and cancer to a private hospital, which eventually consumed every last penny.
The fact that so many people suffer in hospitals is because the economy is not connected up with the outside world, so medicine and knowledge, know how, doesn’t come in. At this stage of the game, the junta is irrelevant. After 40 years it still can’t be displaced and China will ensure that, geopolitically. Tough fact of life.
Volunteering to fight in Burma
Thank you Daniel for your positive postings. I was just about to completely give up on this site until I read your commentary.
After reading what the Col. said at dinner, I hope that his name is used less often on this site. I have always kept his info private until I had his permission to pass it along to some one else.
I know I dislike it when people use my name in the open media, so I respect his right to at least choose when and where his name pops up.
We should all try to be a little more respectful of each other, Myself inclueded.
If you see our friend please tell him that the http://www.storminternationalcorp.com site now has a paypal system set up to accept donations for humanitarian aid projects. Also let him know that We spent the last 4 days at a convention for Doctors trying to get aid and medical personnel into his country and area to assist in the clinic and building of a small hopspital. I do not know how effective our efforts were as of yet… only time will tell.
I will be posting less on this site as I have more work for Burma ahead that will require my full and undivided attention.
I would encourage people on this site to be as pro-active as possible. Take care all, Jack Slade
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
Jon, it is a common fallacy to believe that things will move only when dominant Western states give it a push though understandably widespread among not just Westerners but a lot of the Burmese themselves given the reality of Western powers throwing their weight around so easily these days. It also runs the risk of a dependency culture, expecting either handouts or gunboats at every turn. After all despite globalisation – supposedly new but only new in stage and era – and Western dominance – ever since Vasco da Gama rounded the cape in the first successful attempt at globalisation – we are still dealing with an Eastern land surrounded by Eastern neighbours.
Admittedly a favourable international situation is desirable for domestic struggles to succeed, and on occasion intervention may be a catalyst to trigger change for better or for worse. A decisive and more important factor however is the domestic situation itself when it’s ripe for change. This in turn depends on the balance of forces which here in the case of Burma is overwhelmingly in favour of the regime at this juncture. Just how do you negotiate or reconcile with someone holding a gun to your head?
Don’s and your frustration with the status quo I’m bound to say is merely a fraction of what the peoples of Burma feel. But it doesn’t necessarily mean that the balance cannot change in due course despite such impossible odds. Experts may yet be taken by surprise once again.
Most of us would agree that constructive engagement by ASEAN has only played into the hands of the junta so far, and of course it is a symbiotic relationship between the ruling elites. Granted there is some trickle-down to the populace in terms of economic benefit. Sanctions by the same token deprive the people of this benefit but both the regime and the states concerned also miss out on markets and profits. One group of states throws a lifeline to the regime and another takes a moral stand. Not a complete disaster methinks and both have their use.
But so long as the class relationship between the rulers and the ruled remains unchanged, and given the manifest intransigence on the part of the junta, a consensus of constructive engagement will prove more beneficial to the junta in recognising its legitimacy and contributing to its coffers. India’s change of policy towards Burma competing with China for their mutual neighbour’s resources and strategic and military cooperation is a case in point.
Totalitarian rule and economic prosperity are not mutually exclusive, and have little effect on the class nature of society. We only need to look at China where Communist totalitarian rule can implement capitalist policy so effectively enjoying the absence of checks and balances. Even Singapore is a de facto one-party state. So the risk of this dichotomy between democracy and human rights on one hand and economic development on the other should not be overlooked, although I freely acknowledge that for some of us economic prosperity may be the end all and be all.
Volunteering to fight in Burma
I had dinner with my friend, Nerdah, this evening and told him about this shit and he is furious his name is being bandied about as such.
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
One does have to ask–what exactly is meant by the term “constructive engagement?” It has become such a charged term it should in fact be defined for clarity’s sake. What does it mean; what form does it take; and what is or was it supposed to do?
Is it meant to define a policy in which everyone speak softly to the Tatmadaw, essentially give it what it wants and overlook all it does, while hoping for the best over time? Or is it a code word for obtaining beneficial resource deals in return for political cover? Or is it a bit of both, or neither? Several ASEAN countries have stated that constructive engagement was their policy in the 90s. Added to that the fact that other countries were not unified in their approach (Japan has certainly been ambiguous) and that western firms have traded and do trade with Burma, it could be argued that some form of constructive engagement has played itself out, with some countries making friends; others looking for small steps and others for still more. There was some serious talk of a “transition” before Khin Nyunt fell, and a western diplomat in the region told me at the time that policy people were encouraged and not trying to block it. That would seem constructive. But somehow it never came about.
Let us also not forget that the military elite controls a massive amount of funding from its resource deals (if one reads Sean Turrell) yet UN agencies and others have to plead with it in order for those agencies to act as something of a de facto Ministry of Health.
Additionally, to what extent is the accusation of minorities being separatists really true? Whatever some opposition elites and individuals may feel in their heart of hearts, and whatever their policies were in the past, how far is separatism really on the table or considered a serious policy possibility today? The Karen, for example, welcomed students from the cities in 1988 to their territory (the ABSDF have operated on what is effectively Karen or Karenni territory) along with representatives of minority groups, monk groups (the ABYMU) and political opponents of the regime like the NLD (their place was on Aung San Suu Kyi Street) and D.P.N.S. to Manerplaw. No doubt this was a factor in regime attacks there and so had a significant cost. Also, along with periodic negotiation attempts with Rangoon, the Karen have formed or been part of varied umbrella organizations over the years such as the DAB, the NDF, the NCUB and the more recent Ethnic Nationalities Council. It would seem that much of the talk and effort in minority political circles is about a negotiated constitutional federal solution, though for the Tatmadaw, and perhaps for others as well, that is tantamount to destruction of the state.
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
Moe Aung: Many (most?) people apparently just do not want to accept reality in Burma. That is why they keep proposing ineffective and often counterproductive policies, apparently out of frustration. The point is that no clearcut solution exists, unless you just wipe Burma the way it is off the map and start over. That is not a very practical or humane approach but in essence it seems to be what most of the activists and foreign critics are proposing. Barring that you have to deal with Burma as it is, which means gradual evolutionary change or more of the same stalemated situation, while the Burmese people suffer as much from the actions of outside self appointed do gooders as from their own government. As we have seen following the cyclone, the Burmese people are perfectly capable of acting in their own interest when that is feasible or necessary. But they are there on the spot and as a result most know that the sort of pie in the sky “solutions” proposed by outsiders are not possible under existing circumstances. Not only that, such “solutions” are dangerous and most likely would lead to an even worse situation. Many people in the world, including the Burmese activists in exile, seem to need Burma as a cause for their own purposes and apparently have little concern about the consequences for the Burmese people in the process. For many people Burma has become a caricature rather than a country with real people who have normal everyday needs. This is a sad situation all the way around.
Leave the PA(S)D alone!
29 June 2008
Correction and apology – too excited from being let outside to go get a beer!
The teacher’s comments were from:
From: http://www.weopenmind.com/board/index.php?topic=6924.msg49452#msg49452
р╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╣Ар╕кр╕▓р╕гр╣М р╕Чр╕╡р╣И 10 р╕Юр╕др╕йр╕ар╕▓р╕Др╕б 2551
‘р╕нр╕вр╣Ир╕▓р╣Ар╕Фр╕┤р╕Щр╣Др╕Ыр╕кр╕╣р╣И 6 р╕Хр╕╕р╕ер╕▓р╕п’ : р╣Ар╕Бр╕йр╕╡р╕вр╕г р╣Ар╕Хр╕Кр╕░р╕Юр╕╡р╕гр╕░
Posted by Canр╣Др╕Чр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕З , р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕нр╣Ир╕▓р╕Щ : 90 , 03:02:13 р╕Щ.
Saturday 10 May 2008
“Don’t Walk Into 6 October
by Kasien Dechaphira
Leave the PA(S)D alone!
Lese majeste as Thailand’s first major civil liberties test?
Just wondering out loud – Why hasn’t a group gotten together yet to fight this thing in court from the perspective of infringing civil liberties?
Leave the PA(S)D alone!
29 June 2008
I see the originator has written himself. That leaves me off the hook! Actually, I intentionally left out the name and exact source, as well as most of the translation, in part for confidentiality considerations toward the author and in part because I may be using some of that material in a book in draft on Abuse & Consequences of Lese Majeste laws in Thailand.
I have found that there is a heck of a lot of information on the topic, but it takes a great deal of time to look it up, and most of the ‘good’ material is in Thai.
Speaking of which, I am planning to include comments by Thais specifically on lese majeste and what they think about it. Again, unattributed.
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
I have lived in a Burmese hospital as a member of the family was dieing.
I have used up every penny I had in the world looking after that dieing person.
I have watched Burmese people in that same Rangoon hospital doing exactly the same thing. (Countless others don’t even get as far as a diagnosis.)
Why is this not on television?
Why aren’t there news reports about this?
Why is there never a report on what the sanctions have done to the Burmese people?
Why is every single news report always about the generals, a group of people, that no one can do anything about. After 40 years this is just gratuitous nonsense, by foreigners who want to exhibit their own political correctness at hands length.
Leave the PA(S)D alone!
>A couple of excerpts from Chotisak’s Thammasart teacher I found interesting but which others may or may not: “If he was still studying with me I would probably rebuke, argue with, censure and warn him but Khun Chotisak has already committed this act….. and Thai lives, flesh and blood are the offerings.”
So, this Thammasart teacher, does he/she have a name? I don’t actually care very much who it is, just wondering if he/she is willing to put things on the line, like Chotisak is. (BTW, most professional news organizations are very reluctant – at least in theory – to print ad hominem comments from anonymous sources, so I’m curious where this is from.)
Maybe I am misreading his/her comments, but it doesn’t look like he/she supports freedom of expression, at least for one particular point of view.
Perhaps the excerpts you didn’t post condemn the PAD, Manager website, et al for “proceeding down the same old path to run into another situation like 6 October 1976 such is now being paved”?
If that’s not the case, I’d say that’s a pretty curious reading of history for a Thammasart acharn. Who is beating the ultra-nationalist drum, after all?