Mariner,
to your following comment:
“critics might argue that his majesty is playing both fields at the same time: condemning the lese majeste laws publicly (catering to ‘the west’) but privately determined that these laws remain in force to sustain the royal image.
I think that you would agree on one point: if the laws were not in place the king would not be held in such high regard”
My personal view is that the King was being sincere when he spoke about the fact that he should also be subject to criticism. He made a point to say that he would pardon anyone who was convicted of lese majeste, and which he did when a Swiss man was later convicted for the offence. I truly believe that he will stick with what he has said and will continue to pardon any further convicted persons.
In any case, I don’t think the lese majeste law is something which sustains the royal image. It has been the King’s dedication and love to his people which has led to his immense popularity.
The lese majeste law protects the entire monarchy institution. But if look at all the royals, you will see that the King is vastly the most popular. So how come the others who are similarly protected aren’t anywhere near as popular?
Another thing I want to point out is this. And anyone who knows anything about Thailand will know that this is true. The Thais regard the King as their father. They feel it so strongly because they know that the King regard them as his children, it shows in his actions. Fathers often have to put on the stern face, but they also have a heart of gold. And the children know that.
Now think about this. Would a family allow someone into the house at dinner time, and let him start pointing a finger at the father saying, “Look everyone, I have my sources which I believe to be reliable, and there is reason to believe that your father is this, your father is that, he did this, he did that, and you have all had this way over rosy picture of him.. etc” Well to be honest, even in a Western context, what could you expect to happen, except be asked to leave fairly immediately?
The Thais regard him as their father and he has come to have this special place in everyone’s hearts through his actions. No other royal – who are also protected by lese majeste – has the same connection with their people. So quite frankly, even without lese majeste, I truly believe things wouldn’t be any different.
Especially in an Asian context, the family is held sacred. The King as the people’s father is held sacred and must be protected. We don’t need laws to protect him. The Thais will always protect him out of their love and respect for him, not just as the father of the land, but much more personally as their own father too.
Having lived and worked in Thailand for about 18 years, I have noticed recently a greater willingness among ordinary Thais from many walks of life to take me in their confidence and share private criticisms of HMK and associated royal institutions. For example, development workers complaining about problems caused by the Royal Projects, a housewife criticizing the lavish expense of the Princess’s funeral preparations, businessmen remarking on unfair business practices of the CPB. I guess one can’t say whether this is a trend or not, but it is certainly a departure from the conventional script of unquestioning fealty, which so many followed with a sense of national duty, especially when speaking with foreigners.
Furthermore, there is never anything ideological or political about these comments. Neither Taksin nor PAD is lurking in the shadows. One gets the sense of people slowly adjusting themselves to a new social order–coming soon– in which some of the old taboos have expired or transformed, and the actual state of the nation must be appraised in the glare of daylight. There’s also a measure of anxiety in witnessing the death of the monarchy and at the same time realizing that Thailand has failed to evolve a viable political system.
Before anyone calls me an anti-royalist, I protest on the simple grounds that I am not intelligent enough to shape my thoughts and assertions to conform to such a formal concept.
In fact, Stevenson’s The Revolutionary King (1997) is not legally banned in Thailand. However, it is not sold here by social convention. Most Thais aren’t worried about the errors or speculation in the book but by the fact that the author refers to Nai Luang by his childhood nickname, Lek–hardly befitting a great king!
While we’re on the subject, I have been told that the Stevensons lived with the Thai Royals for some months while researching his book, with even his children attending school with the Royal progeny. It is said that Stevenson was chosen to write HM’s official biography because of the King’s admiration (and translation of) for his book, A Man Called Intrepid. The Royals have never acknowledged The Revolutionary King, however, rumour has it here that there was Royal intervention to prevent the book being officially banned. An obvious hagiography, it is rife with errors though makes a good read!
To my knowledge, there was never an official ban order nor was one published in the Royal Gazette. To my knowledge, Stevenson’s book was never translated into Thai; if someone knows of a translation, I would very much like to see it.
My own reading of The Devil’s Discus is that Kruger does not favour any possible reason for King Ananda’s death by gunshot but merely tantalises us with possible explanations: regicide (and by whom? Certainly for political gain by implicating Pridi and thus removing him from Thailand’s political and populist landscape.) It is a given that the three Royal servants executed nine years later having been acquitted by lower courts took a fall. There is often concern raised over why Nai Luang did not exercise his prerogative of Royal pardon.
The second possibility is suicide (possibly despondent over the Princess Mother’s unwavering insistence that he break his romantic involvement with a sweetheart in Lausanne). A King’s suicide would have been impossible to admit to the Thai public.
The third possibility raised by Kruger is that of accident. As both young Royal sons loved guns and had ready access to them, this raised the (never-to-be-mentioned) possibility that King Ananda’s death may have occurred during gunplay with his younger brother. In fact, many have speculated that this is the reason the King never smiles. It is my personal view that raising this possibility by its title is the real reason The King Never Smiles was banned well before its publication.
However, I must point out that one simply does not see any Royals anywhere hee-hawing in public. It is unseemly not only in Thailand.
Of course, the mystery of Ananda’s death could only be confirmed by three Royals: Somdek Ya, Princess Galyani and the King himself. The former are both dead and it is unlikely the King will say anything. We can hope his children know the real story so this important element of Royal history is not lost forever.
The new Printing Act 2007 has never been properly tested, so if any reader wishes PDF scans of any of these books, Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) will be happy to provide them as part of its Banned Books Project-Celsius 233.
I have listened to, watched and read what Jakrabhop said and it’s not an unusual mix of vested interests and cloudy thinking with some absolute truth tossed in. He was very brave here in Thailand to say what he did, that is for certain. Having just come out of a conversation with a friend yesterday who was one of the senior drafters of the 2007 charter, I brought up the issue of the intent of the charter vis-a-vis the monarchy. In short, the reply was that the intent was not to change anything. In going further, I was told that while the concept of democracy involves free speech, that even open discussion of the role of the monarchy was itself likely to expose the king and monarchy to possible criticism. Thus open discussion is not going to be permitted. I brought up the contradiction between this and the king’s own words that he wanted to hear criticism if he did something wrong, but got the “Yes, but…” reply.
Loyal royalists here won’t allow the lese majeste law even be reformed, much less revoked. However, there was also a private hint given by a Thai colleague that if HM passed away that no. 2 would not be accepted because of his lack of character and wrongful behavior. Just how the Thai people were going to make their displeasure known was not answered. As well, no. 2 is not known as a humanitarian in dealing with issues.
In my view, Mr. Anan should stick to his teaching of Bali-Sansakrit languages and not attempting to show off his very poor understanding of sociological-political theory.
Here’s the link to the sript of the TV program host by Chermsak Pinthong on Manager’s ASTV where the author р╕Фр╕г.р╕нр╕▓р╕Щр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╣М р╣Ар╕лр╕ер╣Ир╕▓р╣Ар╕ер╕┤р╕ир╕зр╕гр╕Бр╕╕р╕е unvealed his “analysis” for the first time. http://www.manager.co.th/Politics/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000060229
Here’s the link to some backgrounds (and photo) of the author, together with an “expose” by a Thaksin supporter. (Anan was one of royalist anti-Thaksin academics in the Faculty of Letters Chula: there’re quite many of them during the anti-Thaksin campaign of 2005-6 and since. I even heard some say they have “links” with “р╣Ар╕Ир╣К” – DON’T ask me, whose pseudonym!) http://www.prachatai.com/webboard/topic.php?id=687910
In my opinion, the article is not as good as the author and all those royalists claim. Above all it’s not much of a “linguistic/etemological” analysis. In fact, this is a “chicken-stolen” (р╕ер╕▒р╕Бр╣Др╕Бр╣И) claim. Consider, for example, the following superficial pseudo-“academic sonding” interpretation of Jakkrapob’s use of “р╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕нр╕╕р╕Ыр╕Цр╕▒р╕бр╕ар╣М” :
р╕Др╕╕р╕Ур╕Ир╕▒р╕Бр╕гр╕ар╕Ю р╣Гр╕Кр╣Йр╕Др╕│р╕зр╣Ир╕▓ patronage р╕лр╕гр╕╖р╕н patronage system р╣Гр╕Щр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╣Бр╕Хр╕Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ 2 р╕Щр╕▒р╕вр╕вр╕░ р╕Фр╕▒р╕Зр╕Щр╕╡р╣Й
р╕Щр╕▒р╕вр╕вр╕░р╕Чр╕╡р╣И 1 :
patronage system р╕Др╕╖р╕н “р╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕нр╕бр╕гр╕▒р╕Ър╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╣Бр╕Хр╕Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Рр╕▓р╕Щр╕░р╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Др╕Щр╣Гр╕Щр╕кр╕▒р╕Зр╕Др╕бр╕гр╕░р╕лр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Гр╕лр╕Нр╣Ир╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕Щр╣Йр╕нр╕в р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Гр╕лр╕Нр╣Ир╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕Щр╣Йр╕нр╕вр╕бр╕╡р╕кр╣Ир╕зр╕Щр╕Кр╣Ир╕зр╕вр╣Ар╕лр╕ер╕╖р╕нр╣Ар╕Бр╕╖р╣Йр╕нр╕Бр╕╣р╕ер╕Бр╕▒р╕Щр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕нр╕│р╕Щр╕зр╕вр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Вр╕вр╕Кр╕Щр╣Мр╣Бр╕Бр╣Ир╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ”
Larry: “Please read them all, most people agree that Jon and Jak are guilty.” The point is that they shouldn’t even be investigated under this law that stems from feudal mentalities. But even if there is such a law in place, no one with half a brain could possibly consider Jonathon guilty of anything like lese majeste. The charges publicised to date are simply crazy. For Jakrapob, as a nice story in the Nation a week or so ago pointed out, much worse was said in parliament about the king and monarchy a few decades ago. This is J’s punishment for daring to speak out against a decrepit system (of which he is a part, of course).
Does anyone know where the the “Jakrapob Code” article by Anant Laulertvorakul of Chulalongkorn University can be found online? Referred to recently in an article:
“…Anant Laulertvorakul, a Thai language expert at Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Arts…wrote the “Jakrapob Code” analysing the core idea behind the ex-minister’s speech.
The thought-provoking article, which clarified Mr Jakrapob’s attitude toward the monarchy brought this 40-year-old lecturer instant fame at a local political forum.
Even though the “Jakrapob Code” generally cast the ex-minister in a negative light, Mr Anant insisted he does not belong to any political camp. Nor does he mean harm to anyone.
The lecturer is also an expert on etymology – a rare linguistic branch which studies the origins and historical development of words.
He found Mr Jakrapob’s speech very interesting and spent three nights working on it, resulting in the 10-page article.
The article was circulated to readers via e-mail and newspapers, which ran his article in full.”
[BTW This is a good example of where there might be convergence between English and Thai media in the future. Using Thai language Google to find the article is problematic unless you know how to do reverse transliterations. Internet technology could allow this to happen instantaneously. Between European languages at least Google’s translation facilities really facilitate communication. (I’ve read whole scholarly tomes with specialised knowledge in German and French this way.) Hopefully NECTEC will have something like this for Thai soon.]
Sidh: “…very sad state the Thai ‘rule of law’ and ‘checks and balances’ is in – which I think is more fundamental than debates about LM’s abuses…”
Yes, yes, yes, too many constitutions is confusing. If I changed the way I did my work everyday (workflow, procedures), I would never get any work done. Yet among all the chaos things are happening, like Thailand is quickly becoming a world leader in biofuel production and adoption with the new accelerated E85 programme. Some compromise is necessary, so as not to fritter away the nation’s resources in an unending political fight. Jakrapob’s ruthless machiavellian approach to managing the media was just pouring more gasoline on the flames. Some people just did what had to be done.
The other line that ran something like, some of you who love Thailand really aren’t going to want to hear this. Maybe he should stick to speaking Thai in his speeches so he can have better control over what he says and avoid language that is going to be, perhaps unintentionally, offensive to most Thais.
Tsuji Masanobu was one of the most brilliant and controversial of Japanese generals. If you can imagine Douglas MacArthur dressed as a nun skulking around post-war London and murdering Princess Elizabeth, then you can buy this story too. Tsuji hid briefly in a wat before fleeing Bangkok to China in late 1945. Stevenson spun that small fact into his tale. It’s one of the best jokes in an excellently comic book.
seen from very far away (in the US), the imagery suggests that we are squarely post-Thaksin, that what we now have is an emerging Thai-Rak-Thai-Na-Rak party. Will they revise the prostitution, too?
Or maybe Jakrapob just said what he believed at the time, having just been released from detention. Maybe he spoke this way because he was just so pissed off by the patronage system and those who keep it in place? I think he was spot on, at least in general terms. He hardly sucks up to Thaksin, referring to him as a sleepwalker in terms of policy and politics. He says that he thinks Thaksin generally meant well but that he got himself offside by sleepwalking into the consequences of the 1997 constitution and the reforms that brought. I think J. spoke his mind in a way that others have been unwilling and too gutless to do.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
Mariner,
to your following comment:
“critics might argue that his majesty is playing both fields at the same time: condemning the lese majeste laws publicly (catering to ‘the west’) but privately determined that these laws remain in force to sustain the royal image.
I think that you would agree on one point: if the laws were not in place the king would not be held in such high regard”
My personal view is that the King was being sincere when he spoke about the fact that he should also be subject to criticism. He made a point to say that he would pardon anyone who was convicted of lese majeste, and which he did when a Swiss man was later convicted for the offence. I truly believe that he will stick with what he has said and will continue to pardon any further convicted persons.
In any case, I don’t think the lese majeste law is something which sustains the royal image. It has been the King’s dedication and love to his people which has led to his immense popularity.
The lese majeste law protects the entire monarchy institution. But if look at all the royals, you will see that the King is vastly the most popular. So how come the others who are similarly protected aren’t anywhere near as popular?
Another thing I want to point out is this. And anyone who knows anything about Thailand will know that this is true. The Thais regard the King as their father. They feel it so strongly because they know that the King regard them as his children, it shows in his actions. Fathers often have to put on the stern face, but they also have a heart of gold. And the children know that.
Now think about this. Would a family allow someone into the house at dinner time, and let him start pointing a finger at the father saying, “Look everyone, I have my sources which I believe to be reliable, and there is reason to believe that your father is this, your father is that, he did this, he did that, and you have all had this way over rosy picture of him.. etc” Well to be honest, even in a Western context, what could you expect to happen, except be asked to leave fairly immediately?
The Thais regard him as their father and he has come to have this special place in everyone’s hearts through his actions. No other royal – who are also protected by lese majeste – has the same connection with their people. So quite frankly, even without lese majeste, I truly believe things wouldn’t be any different.
Especially in an Asian context, the family is held sacred. The King as the people’s father is held sacred and must be protected. We don’t need laws to protect him. The Thais will always protect him out of their love and respect for him, not just as the father of the land, but much more personally as their own father too.
Every move you make …
[…] Every move you make … Andrew Walker New Mandala: June 4, 2008 […]
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
Having lived and worked in Thailand for about 18 years, I have noticed recently a greater willingness among ordinary Thais from many walks of life to take me in their confidence and share private criticisms of HMK and associated royal institutions. For example, development workers complaining about problems caused by the Royal Projects, a housewife criticizing the lavish expense of the Princess’s funeral preparations, businessmen remarking on unfair business practices of the CPB. I guess one can’t say whether this is a trend or not, but it is certainly a departure from the conventional script of unquestioning fealty, which so many followed with a sense of national duty, especially when speaking with foreigners.
Furthermore, there is never anything ideological or political about these comments. Neither Taksin nor PAD is lurking in the shadows. One gets the sense of people slowly adjusting themselves to a new social order–coming soon– in which some of the old taboos have expired or transformed, and the actual state of the nation must be appraised in the glare of daylight. There’s also a measure of anxiety in witnessing the death of the monarchy and at the same time realizing that Thailand has failed to evolve a viable political system.
Before anyone calls me an anti-royalist, I protest on the simple grounds that I am not intelligent enough to shape my thoughts and assertions to conform to such a formal concept.
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
In fact, Stevenson’s The Revolutionary King (1997) is not legally banned in Thailand. However, it is not sold here by social convention. Most Thais aren’t worried about the errors or speculation in the book but by the fact that the author refers to Nai Luang by his childhood nickname, Lek–hardly befitting a great king!
While we’re on the subject, I have been told that the Stevensons lived with the Thai Royals for some months while researching his book, with even his children attending school with the Royal progeny. It is said that Stevenson was chosen to write HM’s official biography because of the King’s admiration (and translation of) for his book, A Man Called Intrepid. The Royals have never acknowledged The Revolutionary King, however, rumour has it here that there was Royal intervention to prevent the book being officially banned. An obvious hagiography, it is rife with errors though makes a good read!
To my knowledge, there was never an official ban order nor was one published in the Royal Gazette. To my knowledge, Stevenson’s book was never translated into Thai; if someone knows of a translation, I would very much like to see it.
My own reading of The Devil’s Discus is that Kruger does not favour any possible reason for King Ananda’s death by gunshot but merely tantalises us with possible explanations: regicide (and by whom? Certainly for political gain by implicating Pridi and thus removing him from Thailand’s political and populist landscape.) It is a given that the three Royal servants executed nine years later having been acquitted by lower courts took a fall. There is often concern raised over why Nai Luang did not exercise his prerogative of Royal pardon.
The second possibility is suicide (possibly despondent over the Princess Mother’s unwavering insistence that he break his romantic involvement with a sweetheart in Lausanne). A King’s suicide would have been impossible to admit to the Thai public.
The third possibility raised by Kruger is that of accident. As both young Royal sons loved guns and had ready access to them, this raised the (never-to-be-mentioned) possibility that King Ananda’s death may have occurred during gunplay with his younger brother. In fact, many have speculated that this is the reason the King never smiles. It is my personal view that raising this possibility by its title is the real reason The King Never Smiles was banned well before its publication.
However, I must point out that one simply does not see any Royals anywhere hee-hawing in public. It is unseemly not only in Thailand.
Of course, the mystery of Ananda’s death could only be confirmed by three Royals: Somdek Ya, Princess Galyani and the King himself. The former are both dead and it is unlikely the King will say anything. We can hope his children know the real story so this important element of Royal history is not lost forever.
The new Printing Act 2007 has never been properly tested, so if any reader wishes PDF scans of any of these books, Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) will be happy to provide them as part of its Banned Books Project-Celsius 233.
facthaiATgmailDOTcom
Lèse majesté and the BBC
I have listened to, watched and read what Jakrabhop said and it’s not an unusual mix of vested interests and cloudy thinking with some absolute truth tossed in. He was very brave here in Thailand to say what he did, that is for certain. Having just come out of a conversation with a friend yesterday who was one of the senior drafters of the 2007 charter, I brought up the issue of the intent of the charter vis-a-vis the monarchy. In short, the reply was that the intent was not to change anything. In going further, I was told that while the concept of democracy involves free speech, that even open discussion of the role of the monarchy was itself likely to expose the king and monarchy to possible criticism. Thus open discussion is not going to be permitted. I brought up the contradiction between this and the king’s own words that he wanted to hear criticism if he did something wrong, but got the “Yes, but…” reply.
Loyal royalists here won’t allow the lese majeste law even be reformed, much less revoked. However, there was also a private hint given by a Thai colleague that if HM passed away that no. 2 would not be accepted because of his lack of character and wrongful behavior. Just how the Thai people were going to make their displeasure known was not answered. As well, no. 2 is not known as a humanitarian in dealing with issues.
Sugar and spice and all things nice!
So when tension of confrontation increase and government threaten to use force, they bring in woman and children… nice strategy, very commendable…
PS – remind me of that prank pic of baby with bomb belt… innocent n harmless…
“Does anyone care what Jakrapop actually said?”
In my view, Mr. Anan should stick to his teaching of Bali-Sansakrit languages and not attempting to show off his very poor understanding of sociological-political theory.
“Does anyone care what Jakrapop actually said?”
Here’s the link to the article as originally appeared on Manager website.
http://www.manager.co.th/Politics/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000061329
Here’s the link to the sript of the TV program host by Chermsak Pinthong on Manager’s ASTV where the author р╕Фр╕г.р╕нр╕▓р╕Щр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╣М р╣Ар╕лр╕ер╣Ир╕▓р╣Ар╕ер╕┤р╕ир╕зр╕гр╕Бр╕╕р╕е unvealed his “analysis” for the first time.
http://www.manager.co.th/Politics/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000060229
Here’s the link to some backgrounds (and photo) of the author, together with an “expose” by a Thaksin supporter. (Anan was one of royalist anti-Thaksin academics in the Faculty of Letters Chula: there’re quite many of them during the anti-Thaksin campaign of 2005-6 and since. I even heard some say they have “links” with “р╣Ар╕Ир╣К” – DON’T ask me, whose pseudonym!)
http://www.prachatai.com/webboard/topic.php?id=687910
In my opinion, the article is not as good as the author and all those royalists claim. Above all it’s not much of a “linguistic/etemological” analysis. In fact, this is a “chicken-stolen” (р╕ер╕▒р╕Бр╣Др╕Бр╣И) claim. Consider, for example, the following superficial pseudo-“academic sonding” interpretation of Jakkrapob’s use of “р╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕нр╕╕р╕Ыр╕Цр╕▒р╕бр╕ар╣М” :
р╕Др╕╕р╕Ур╕Ир╕▒р╕Бр╕гр╕ар╕Ю р╣Гр╕Кр╣Йр╕Др╕│р╕зр╣Ир╕▓ patronage р╕лр╕гр╕╖р╕н patronage system р╣Гр╕Щр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╣Бр╕Хр╕Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ 2 р╕Щр╕▒р╕вр╕вр╕░ р╕Фр╕▒р╕Зр╕Щр╕╡р╣Й
р╕Щр╕▒р╕вр╕вр╕░р╕Чр╕╡р╣И 1 :
patronage system р╕Др╕╖р╕н “р╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕нр╕бр╕гр╕▒р╕Ър╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╣Бр╕Хр╕Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Рр╕▓р╕Щр╕░р╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Др╕Щр╣Гр╕Щр╕кр╕▒р╕Зр╕Др╕бр╕гр╕░р╕лр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Гр╕лр╕Нр╣Ир╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕Щр╣Йр╕нр╕в р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Гр╕лр╕Нр╣Ир╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕Щр╣Йр╕нр╕вр╕бр╕╡р╕кр╣Ир╕зр╕Щр╕Кр╣Ир╕зр╕вр╣Ар╕лр╕ер╕╖р╕нр╣Ар╕Бр╕╖р╣Йр╕нр╕Бр╕╣р╕ер╕Бр╕▒р╕Щр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕нр╕│р╕Щр╕зр╕вр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Вр╕вр╕Кр╕Щр╣Мр╣Бр╕Бр╣Ир╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ”
р╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Щр╕▒р╕вр╕вр╕░р╕Щр╕╡р╣Й р╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕нр╕╕р╕Ыр╕Цр╕▒р╕бр╕ар╣Мр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ъ win-win р╕Чр╕▒р╣Йр╕Зр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Ар╕Бр╕╖р╣Йр╕нр╕Бр╕╣р╕ер╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕гр╕▒р╕Ър╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Вр╕вр╕Кр╕Щр╣Мр╣Ар╕Бр╕╖р╣Йр╕нр╕Бр╕╣р╕е р╕кр╣Ир╕зр╕Щр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╣Др╕бр╣И win р╕Фр╣Йр╕зр╕в р╕Др╕╖р╕н р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕Щр╣Йр╕нр╕вр╕Др╕Щр╕нр╕╖р╣Ир╕Щр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Др╕Фр╣Йр╕гр╕▒р╕Ър╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Вр╕вр╕Кр╕Щр╣Мр╣Ар╕Бр╕╖р╣Йр╕нр╕Бр╕╣р╕ер╕Фр╣Йр╕зр╕в р╕Фр╕▒р╕Зр╕Щр╕▒р╣Йр╕Щр╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕нр╕╕р╕Ыр╕Цр╕▒р╕бр╕ар╣Мр╕Ир╕╢р╕Зр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Гр╕Кр╣Ир╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕╖р╕Щр╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣Ир╕Ър╕Щр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Др╕┤р╕Фр╣Ар╕кр╕бр╕нр╕ар╕▓р╕Д р╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕Бр╣Зр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╕Цр╕╢р╕Зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Вр╕▒р╕Фр╕лр╕гр╕╖р╕нр╣Бр╕вр╣Йр╕Зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕нр╕╕р╕Фр╕бр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╣Мр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕▓р╕Шр╕┤р╕Ыр╣Др╕Хр╕вр╣Гр╕Щр╕ер╕▒р╕Бр╕йр╕Ур╕░р╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕Ир╕░р╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣Ир╕гр╣Ир╕зр╕бр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Др╕Фр╣Й р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕кр╕│р╕Др╕▒р╕Нр╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Щр╕▒р╕вр╕вр╕░р╕Щр╕╡р╣Й р╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕нр╕╕р╕Ыр╕Цр╕▒р╕бр╕ар╣Мр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Гр╕Кр╣Ир╕нр╕╕р╕Фр╕бр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╣Мр╕Чр╕▓р╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕З р╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Гр╕Кр╣Ир╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕нр╕Ър╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ыр╕Бр╕Др╕гр╕нр╕З р╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕кр╕▒р╕бр╕Юр╕▒р╕Щр╕Шр╣Мр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Др╕Щр╣Гр╕Щр╕кр╕▒р╕Зр╕Др╕б р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Гр╕Кр╣Ир╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕бр╕╡р╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣Ир╣Ар╕Йр╕Юр╕▓р╕░р╣Гр╕Щр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕ир╣Др╕Чр╕в р╕Ыр╕▒р╕Ир╕Ир╕╕р╕Ър╕▒р╕Щ р╕Ир╕╡р╕Щ р╣Ар╕Бр╕▓р╕лр╕ер╕╡ р╕Нр╕╡р╣Ир╕Ыр╕╕р╣Ир╕Щ р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕лр╕ер╕▓р╕вр╕Кр╕▓р╕Хр╕┤р╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╣Ар╕нр╣Ар╕Кр╕╡р╕вр╕Бр╣Зр╕вр╕▒р╕Зр╕бр╕╡р╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣И
Lèse majesté and the BBC
Larry: “Please read them all, most people agree that Jon and Jak are guilty.” The point is that they shouldn’t even be investigated under this law that stems from feudal mentalities. But even if there is such a law in place, no one with half a brain could possibly consider Jonathon guilty of anything like lese majeste. The charges publicised to date are simply crazy. For Jakrapob, as a nice story in the Nation a week or so ago pointed out, much worse was said in parliament about the king and monarchy a few decades ago. This is J’s punishment for daring to speak out against a decrepit system (of which he is a part, of course).
“Does anyone care what Jakrapop actually said?”
Does anyone know where the the “Jakrapob Code” article by Anant Laulertvorakul of Chulalongkorn University can be found online? Referred to recently in an article:
“…Anant Laulertvorakul, a Thai language expert at Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Arts…wrote the “Jakrapob Code” analysing the core idea behind the ex-minister’s speech.
The thought-provoking article, which clarified Mr Jakrapob’s attitude toward the monarchy brought this 40-year-old lecturer instant fame at a local political forum.
Even though the “Jakrapob Code” generally cast the ex-minister in a negative light, Mr Anant insisted he does not belong to any political camp. Nor does he mean harm to anyone.
The lecturer is also an expert on etymology – a rare linguistic branch which studies the origins and historical development of words.
He found Mr Jakrapob’s speech very interesting and spent three nights working on it, resulting in the 10-page article.
The article was circulated to readers via e-mail and newspapers, which ran his article in full.”
http://www.bangkokpost.com/020608_News/02Jun2008_news09.php
[BTW This is a good example of where there might be convergence between English and Thai media in the future. Using Thai language Google to find the article is problematic unless you know how to do reverse transliterations. Internet technology could allow this to happen instantaneously. Between European languages at least Google’s translation facilities really facilitate communication. (I’ve read whole scholarly tomes with specialised knowledge in German and French this way.) Hopefully NECTEC will have something like this for Thai soon.]
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
I try to upload a file and give you a link later.
just download it!!
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
Illuson land…
How can I buy/obtain it? I can send cash, etc., or just download it.
Thanks.
FGA
Laughing with Ladda
[…] will Ms. Ladda Tangsupachai have to say about […]
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
I have Devil’s Discus pdf files (Thai version) but it’s very big files (253 MB)
“Does anyone care what Jakrapop actually said?”
Sidh: “…very sad state the Thai ‘rule of law’ and ‘checks and balances’ is in – which I think is more fundamental than debates about LM’s abuses…”
Yes, yes, yes, too many constitutions is confusing. If I changed the way I did my work everyday (workflow, procedures), I would never get any work done. Yet among all the chaos things are happening, like Thailand is quickly becoming a world leader in biofuel production and adoption with the new accelerated E85 programme. Some compromise is necessary, so as not to fritter away the nation’s resources in an unending political fight. Jakrapob’s ruthless machiavellian approach to managing the media was just pouring more gasoline on the flames. Some people just did what had to be done.
The other line that ran something like, some of you who love Thailand really aren’t going to want to hear this. Maybe he should stick to speaking Thai in his speeches so he can have better control over what he says and avoid language that is going to be, perhaps unintentionally, offensive to most Thais.
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
To Clifford
Tsuji Masanobu was one of the most brilliant and controversial of Japanese generals. If you can imagine Douglas MacArthur dressed as a nun skulking around post-war London and murdering Princess Elizabeth, then you can buy this story too. Tsuji hid briefly in a wat before fleeing Bangkok to China in late 1945. Stevenson spun that small fact into his tale. It’s one of the best jokes in an excellently comic book.
Sugar and spice and all things nice!
seen from very far away (in the US), the imagery suggests that we are squarely post-Thaksin, that what we now have is an emerging Thai-Rak-Thai-Na-Rak party. Will they revise the prostitution, too?
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
As with Mr Anderson, is it possible to receive this book in an electronic form in English?
“Does anyone care what Jakrapop actually said?”
Or maybe Jakrapob just said what he believed at the time, having just been released from detention. Maybe he spoke this way because he was just so pissed off by the patronage system and those who keep it in place? I think he was spot on, at least in general terms. He hardly sucks up to Thaksin, referring to him as a sleepwalker in terms of policy and politics. He says that he thinks Thaksin generally meant well but that he got himself offside by sleepwalking into the consequences of the 1997 constitution and the reforms that brought. I think J. spoke his mind in a way that others have been unwilling and too gutless to do.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
my above comment is addressed to Khun Jop