jonfernquest : “IMHO people who attack other people, like the guy in the movie theatre, do not do honour to His Majesty the King at all, they are rather an embarassment.”
You buy into the ideological machinations of the palace too much. These nationalist-monarchists are essentially doing the bidding of the palace. They want these events; they encourage them. I know, the king said once that the laws cause him problems, but he really does need them and so does the palace.
I’m cheering Nepal’s Maoists (for the moment). Get rid of the daft feudalists.
I can answer that for Grasshopper. Its the tiny bean bags that are kicked about in a circle of people–with the goal of not allowing it to hit the ground.
It reminds me of seeing a couple – not Chootisak – not stand for the anthem about 18 months ago – I was directly behind them so I know they didn’t stand. I vaguely remember the girl saying something to the guy, but he just sat there. No one else said anything. For me the amusing part was, I tried to have a look at the guy and saw that he had the words POLICE written on the back of his jacket and those police-style black shiny shoes.
Chootisak’s argument, like Sulak used in the 90s, will be that he didn’t intend to insult the monarchy. He can then ask the complaint, do they know view the monarchy in a lesser light because of his actions? No one could admit to this, least all of the royalist who complained, so there is no insult.
The punishment maybe should fit the crime. Kick him out and ban him from the theatre. Try him for high treason? That just looks silly and cheapens the law.
It also provides a opportunity for people who have a lot of violent negative energy to hurt other people. The guy in the movie theatre was attacked, as I remember.
How many times do you hear, I’m a warrior (Saprang), I will die for my King, I will fight to the death, etc, etc. Is there really a need to be violent and attack people and fight to the death nowadays? Even back in the 1976 Red Gaur redneck days? IMHO people who attack other people, like the guy in the movie theatre, do not do honour to His Majesty the King at all, they are rather an embarassment. I remember sitting by the side of the road peacefully reading my book many years ago, when a drunk out of uniform police officer saw fit to sit down and lecture me about Thailand. He kept repeating (rather metonymically): I am Thailand, I am Thailand, I am Thailand. He thought he was, but he wasn’t and isn’t.
I once sat down during the playing of “God Save the Queen” in an official event in 1972. No response from anyone. Don’t think I have been in an event where they have played that horrid song again.
Observer : I have heard that story before. Is it an urban legend? The other side of the coin is that the people in the post office would vigorously bash the king’s head on stamps to postmark a letter….
The king deserves to be disrespected. I take Chotisak’s action to be all of the things mentioned above and an act of recognizing that the king is unworthy of the treatment he is accorded (and so would anyone else be unworthy of the fawning adulation he gets).
Srithanonchai said:‘The more obvious motive would be that he wanted to rebel against the state-imposed procedure’
Sueksit said: ‘What they want is to put him in a proper perspective and not to go on insisting that he is an omnipotent divine being. Treat him as a fellow human being so that we can tolerate any human faults in him’
You both have given plausible, but differing, explanations of what his motive could have been – rather than us guessing what his real motives were, I would like to see him give more of an an explanation.
So far all we know is that he was an anti coup activist, he chose to go against a generally accepted practice or custom, one idiot took his exception too far, lese majeste has been invoked, and his only explanation so far is that thinking differently is not a crime.
I can understand the stand he has taken now that lese majeste has been (IMO foolishly) invoked , however it would be interesting to hear his reasons for not standing in the first place (even though it clearly should not be a crime, whatever the reasons)
To me, the only real crime that looks to have taken place was the aggressive attack by Nawamin.
There is no law saying you have to stand in the theater. It’s one of those conformity things we do. I think he will get away with framing it as an issue of non-conformity rather than an issue of being anti-monarchy, especially given the light of the international media picking up on the story. I don’t mind the practice as I’ve been doing it all my life, but many of my visiting friends find the practice odd.
Like Ngadeleeng though, I am curious to know how he frames the issue.
Several years ago, we had a farang consultant come to Thailand. He dropped a 100 baht note and stepped on it to stop it from blowing away, at which point one of the royalist dervishes gave him a tougue lashing that he very seriously feared would turn into much worse. And I am pretty sure he had no intention of insulting the king.
I wonder what will happen when the picture of the present king is replaced with that of his successor. Most Thais don’t have great problems paying respect to the present king by getting up from their seats before the movie starts. But a great many Thais will be hard-pressed to do the same for his successor. Will there be more demonstrated dissent? Or will the authorities show sufficiency reasoning and discontinue the practice after the unavoidable departure?
Many, I am sure, intend neither insult nor disrespect to HMK. What they want is to put him in a proper perspective and not to go on insisting that he is an omnipotent divine being. Treat him as a fellow human being so that we can tolerate any human faults in him.
How can remaining seated in a cinema mean that he wanted to insult the monarchy? The more obvious motive would be that he wanted to rebel against the state-imposed procedure. Anyway, even more interesting than Khun Chotisak’s action is the reaction by that fellow visitor to the cinema. That person had been so much soaked in nationalist and royalist propaganda that he was not only prepared to disrespect Khun Chotisak’s individual rights as a citizen. Rather, that person developed a very strong emotional outrage about his behavior, and this emotional reaction was based on the long years of preceding propaganda. Even worse, he could not balance his own political preferences and his emotional state with a consideration of the political rights of a fellow citizen, but rather even acted on his emotions by mobilizing state authorities so that they would suppress that fellow citizen’s right to dissent. This sort of political culture is quite widespread in Thailand.
Nonconformity is the greatest of the Thai sins. Thinking differently is not merely a crime, but a threat to society that needs to be addressed through a massive campaign by the Culture Ministry and others.
Pull out the brick of conformity and the whole fortress could come with it. I don’t see this as a small or accidental historical relic. It is a conscious and carefully constructed building block of the machine.
The publicity should be good and I generally support him taking a stand against the draconian lese majeste laws (particularly the ability of anyone to make the charge).
No one is harmed by merely ‘thinking differently’ and that clearly should not be a crime, so I also support him on that point.
However, it will be interesting how he reconciles his act of not standing with his claim that he did not want to insult the monarchy – that’s a bit hard to believe, unless he offers careful explanations.
I followed that link but it seems to be just a general website for The Princess Maha Siridhorn Anthropology Centre – in which particular part of the site is the presentation located?
Stephen- I hear what you are saying, however, I would prefer to stick to the ICG, RI reports. When an organization is clearly not neutral it’s difficult to consider its findings credible. There are several Thailand-based organizations that collect data from Burmese villagers by asking them very leading questions and then interpreting it the way they want to make their case.
It would be useful if the international humanitarian agencies working inside Burma shared their data, complete with statements from villagers they are assisting, so that one could get both sides of the story.
I encourage anyone critical of aid inside Burma to form that opinion after traveling there – both the Rangoon way and cross-border.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
jonfernquest : “IMHO people who attack other people, like the guy in the movie theatre, do not do honour to His Majesty the King at all, they are rather an embarassment.”
You buy into the ideological machinations of the palace too much. These nationalist-monarchists are essentially doing the bidding of the palace. They want these events; they encourage them. I know, the king said once that the laws cause him problems, but he really does need them and so does the palace.
I’m cheering Nepal’s Maoists (for the moment). Get rid of the daft feudalists.
Report on Shan conference in London
I wish I were there.
Maw Htun
Lèse majesté and the BBC
I can answer that for Grasshopper. Its the tiny bean bags that are kicked about in a circle of people–with the goal of not allowing it to hit the ground.
Continue with your interesting argument.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
It reminds me of seeing a couple – not Chootisak – not stand for the anthem about 18 months ago – I was directly behind them so I know they didn’t stand. I vaguely remember the girl saying something to the guy, but he just sat there. No one else said anything. For me the amusing part was, I tried to have a look at the guy and saw that he had the words POLICE written on the back of his jacket and those police-style black shiny shoes.
Chootisak’s argument, like Sulak used in the 90s, will be that he didn’t intend to insult the monarchy. He can then ask the complaint, do they know view the monarchy in a lesser light because of his actions? No one could admit to this, least all of the royalist who complained, so there is no insult.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
The punishment maybe should fit the crime. Kick him out and ban him from the theatre. Try him for high treason? That just looks silly and cheapens the law.
It also provides a opportunity for people who have a lot of violent negative energy to hurt other people. The guy in the movie theatre was attacked, as I remember.
How many times do you hear, I’m a warrior (Saprang), I will die for my King, I will fight to the death, etc, etc. Is there really a need to be violent and attack people and fight to the death nowadays? Even back in the 1976 Red Gaur redneck days? IMHO people who attack other people, like the guy in the movie theatre, do not do honour to His Majesty the King at all, they are rather an embarassment. I remember sitting by the side of the road peacefully reading my book many years ago, when a drunk out of uniform police officer saw fit to sit down and lecture me about Thailand. He kept repeating (rather metonymically): I am Thailand, I am Thailand, I am Thailand. He thought he was, but he wasn’t and isn’t.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
I once sat down during the playing of “God Save the Queen” in an official event in 1972. No response from anyone. Don’t think I have been in an event where they have played that horrid song again.
Observer : I have heard that story before. Is it an urban legend? The other side of the coin is that the people in the post office would vigorously bash the king’s head on stamps to postmark a letter….
The king deserves to be disrespected. I take Chotisak’s action to be all of the things mentioned above and an act of recognizing that the king is unworthy of the treatment he is accorded (and so would anyone else be unworthy of the fawning adulation he gets).
Ringbarking a government
No such commentary from me.
Plus, Thaksin’s not exactly getting coverage in the 8 o’clock news is he? Nor are these state ceremonies.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Srithanonchai said:‘The more obvious motive would be that he wanted to rebel against the state-imposed procedure’
Sueksit said: ‘What they want is to put him in a proper perspective and not to go on insisting that he is an omnipotent divine being. Treat him as a fellow human being so that we can tolerate any human faults in him’
You both have given plausible, but differing, explanations of what his motive could have been – rather than us guessing what his real motives were, I would like to see him give more of an an explanation.
So far all we know is that he was an anti coup activist, he chose to go against a generally accepted practice or custom, one idiot took his exception too far, lese majeste has been invoked, and his only explanation so far is that thinking differently is not a crime.
I can understand the stand he has taken now that lese majeste has been (IMO foolishly) invoked , however it would be interesting to hear his reasons for not standing in the first place (even though it clearly should not be a crime, whatever the reasons)
To me, the only real crime that looks to have taken place was the aggressive attack by Nawamin.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
I agree with most here.
There is no law saying you have to stand in the theater. It’s one of those conformity things we do. I think he will get away with framing it as an issue of non-conformity rather than an issue of being anti-monarchy, especially given the light of the international media picking up on the story. I don’t mind the practice as I’ve been doing it all my life, but many of my visiting friends find the practice odd.
Like Ngadeleeng though, I am curious to know how he frames the issue.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Srithanonchai,
Several years ago, we had a farang consultant come to Thailand. He dropped a 100 baht note and stepped on it to stop it from blowing away, at which point one of the royalist dervishes gave him a tougue lashing that he very seriously feared would turn into much worse. And I am pretty sure he had no intention of insulting the king.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
I wonder what will happen when the picture of the present king is replaced with that of his successor. Most Thais don’t have great problems paying respect to the present king by getting up from their seats before the movie starts. But a great many Thais will be hard-pressed to do the same for his successor. Will there be more demonstrated dissent? Or will the authorities show sufficiency reasoning and discontinue the practice after the unavoidable departure?
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Many, I am sure, intend neither insult nor disrespect to HMK. What they want is to put him in a proper perspective and not to go on insisting that he is an omnipotent divine being. Treat him as a fellow human being so that we can tolerate any human faults in him.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
How can remaining seated in a cinema mean that he wanted to insult the monarchy? The more obvious motive would be that he wanted to rebel against the state-imposed procedure. Anyway, even more interesting than Khun Chotisak’s action is the reaction by that fellow visitor to the cinema. That person had been so much soaked in nationalist and royalist propaganda that he was not only prepared to disrespect Khun Chotisak’s individual rights as a citizen. Rather, that person developed a very strong emotional outrage about his behavior, and this emotional reaction was based on the long years of preceding propaganda. Even worse, he could not balance his own political preferences and his emotional state with a consideration of the political rights of a fellow citizen, but rather even acted on his emotions by mobilizing state authorities so that they would suppress that fellow citizen’s right to dissent. This sort of political culture is quite widespread in Thailand.
Business professionals prostrating
-> Srithanonchai
For sure Siam Paragon practises, dutyfully,the Sufficiency Economy.
The best proof : they show inside the commercial center a Porsche car, but not a Ferrari (or it might be the contrary, sorry I’m not an expert).
Anyway, that tells a lot. 😉
We could add for that matter that Siam Paragon is the Mount Olympus of… the bad taste.
But that would be dutyfully too greek.
PS : 1000 THB for this book ? Sorry, that’s wayyyyy too expensive.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Nonconformity is the greatest of the Thai sins. Thinking differently is not merely a crime, but a threat to society that needs to be addressed through a massive campaign by the Culture Ministry and others.
Pull out the brick of conformity and the whole fortress could come with it. I don’t see this as a small or accidental historical relic. It is a conscious and carefully constructed building block of the machine.
Ringbarking a government
What’s wrong with Thaksin’s 99 temple merit making tour?
Handley wrote a book on that sort of stuff, and the last time I looked it had attracted the most commentary here at NM.
Not interesting anymore?
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
The publicity should be good and I generally support him taking a stand against the draconian lese majeste laws (particularly the ability of anyone to make the charge).
No one is harmed by merely ‘thinking differently’ and that clearly should not be a crime, so I also support him on that point.
However, it will be interesting how he reconciles his act of not standing with his claim that he did not want to insult the monarchy – that’s a bit hard to believe, unless he offers careful explanations.
Lèse majesté and the BBC
Grasshopper – what is a ‘hackysack circle’? Sounds fascinating.
Childbirth in Isan
Dear Anders,
I followed that link but it seems to be just a general website for The Princess Maha Siridhorn Anthropology Centre – in which particular part of the site is the presentation located?
Many thanks
Politics, aid, Burma and “solidarity”
Stephen- I hear what you are saying, however, I would prefer to stick to the ICG, RI reports. When an organization is clearly not neutral it’s difficult to consider its findings credible. There are several Thailand-based organizations that collect data from Burmese villagers by asking them very leading questions and then interpreting it the way they want to make their case.
It would be useful if the international humanitarian agencies working inside Burma shared their data, complete with statements from villagers they are assisting, so that one could get both sides of the story.
I encourage anyone critical of aid inside Burma to form that opinion after traveling there – both the Rangoon way and cross-border.