One should be careful with the concept of legitimacy. This is an empirical concept. Whether or not something is legitimate depends on the empirical existence of a certain group of people who think that this something is exemplary and should be the way it is. This normally concerns only a small group of people. A bigger group of people is covered by the term mass compliance. People comply with demands for action for a variety of reasons, e.g. because they think a policy direction is good, or a leader is strong. Finally, there are those who do or think things merely out of being used to them.
When a person or group claims that, e.g. Thaksin, had lost his legitimacy, then the questions are: 1) Were there no people any longer who thought that he is good and should be PM; 2) Were there no people any longer who complied with his requests?
Merely claiming that a person or a structure had lost its legitimacy, without looking into the empirical situation, is a rather silly political approach to a social science concept. This approach merely means that a person (Sonthi, e.g.) or group (PAD, e.g.) did not like Thaksin/TRT any longer. It has nothing to do with legitimacy as a scholarly term, but it uses its good name and honorable ring.
Vichai Raksriaksorn, chairman of King Power, presented the money to the king on 7 February 2008. A picture of the event appeared on p. 20 of Matichon daily (Prachachuen section) on 21 February. The amount was 900 million baht. This was not a donation by Vichai or King Power, but the proceeds of a charity fund-raising scheme which Vichai and King Power helped to organize – selling plastic wristbands and related material with royal insignia.
On the Forbes 2007 list, Vichai ranked 21st among Thais with a fortune of US$ 205 million (about 6.5 billion baht).
His history is pretty obscure, and I’d welcome any info from anyone who knows more than this:
He had his first duty free (DF) venture in Hong Kong airport in the 1980s. He could not break the ring at Don Muang (run by Sombun Rahong), but opened the in-town DF store at Ploenchit in 1989. He also started DF shops in Cambodia, China, and Macao. By 1995 he managed to get round Rahong, make connections in the air force and AAT, and opened a shop in Don Muang in 1995. ACM Phinit Saraithong is now on King Power board. In 2006, he got an exclusive 10-year deal to run DF and retail at Suvarnabhumi.
He likes polo. He goes to UK and plays with Princes Charles and William. He recently bought 384 rai from the Chan Issara family near the airport. On this he is building a polo field, 9-hole golf course, and forty-nine 2-rai housing plots.
He is developing a 31 rai plot in Soi Rang-ngam (near Victory Monument) with an office building for his group, a DF mall, and the Pullman King Power hotel. The land is leased from the Crown Property Bureau.
Anyone know anything more? What’s his background? What’s the HK connection? Is he another split family like Sophonphanich, Asvabhokin, etc ? Who were his key contacts in the air force?
The MORE anyone, like Michael, claims ‘moral high-grounds’ or ‘principles’ (socialists, human rights, or whatever) against elected politicians, but not dare doing the same to THE MUDERER BEHIND SARIT AND 6 TULA, the more that person is a fake.
In 1957 immediately after Sarit seized power, Bhumibol issued a proclamation appointing Sarit as “Gardian of the Capital” and urged all citizens to obey Sarit. The proclamation HAD NO COUNTERSIGNATURE in DIRECT VIOLATION of the 1952 Constitution. Sarit then went on to kill people without any due process whatsover.
WHO SUPPORTED HIM?
WHO was the ‘invisible hand’ behind 6 Tula, the most brutal massacre in modern Thai history?
ISSUE THE CALL NOW, Michael.
Otherwise all your ‘brave’, ‘socialit’, ‘leftist’ denunciations of Thaksin, your call for him to go , etc. ARE ALL FAKE.
Being against the coup, does not have to mean that one must support Thaksin. Why people such as Somsak continue to require that people support the legitimacy of figures such as Thaksin I have no idea
I have no time at the moment for a long reply to Michael’s post. I just want to ask these direct questions:
Would you dare saying the same thing about King Bhumibol? If not, why? If not, why on earth would you say this to an elected PM?
Is KB more legitimate than Thaksin? Even IF you claim BOTH are EQUALLY ILLEGITMATE, WHY NOT DARE SAYING SO?
The PRETENTION of the “song mai aw” camp is just that: they ONLY dare saying “YOU’RE FREAKING ILLEGITMATE to one side. BUT WHERE IS THE SAME COURAGE TO SAY SO TO “ANOTHER SIDE?
There is in fact NO “song mai ao”. Only those р╕Фр╕▒р╕Фр╕Ир╕гр╕┤р╕Х like Michael who can only show “courage” to attack politician.
I CHALLANGE YOU RIGHT NOW TO SAY : IS BHUMIBOL LEGITIMATE? SHOUD HE GO? Issue a call NOW, like you do in Thaksin’s case, to OUST KB!
IF anybody who claim to “DON’T WANT BOTH SIDE” can show he/she applies THE SAME CRITERIA, the SAME KIND OF DENUNCIATION, the SAME KIND of “brave” WORD with KB as he/she does with Thaksin, I’LL STOP WRITING forever!
First, Koh Tsu Koon is not from UMNO’s political party but from Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia (Malaysian People’s Movement Party), another political party from the Barisan Nasional (National Front), which UMNO is one of parties.
Second, Jeff Ooi is a Malaysian born in the northern Malaysian state of Kedah and grew up among Malay children in kampung (rural)environment. The statement indicated that “It will be interesting to see if a non-Malaysian can break the UMNO stranglehold” is misleading. It should be “It will be interesting to see if a non-Malay ethnic group…”
The category of “non-Malaysian” will be mistakenly see Jeff Ooi as a non-Malaysian citizen. In addition, “Malaysian” does not refer to Malay or someone who belongs to Malay ethnic group per se. It encompases all the ethnic groups such as Chinese, Tamils, Eurasians, Ibans, Bidayuhs, Kadazan-dusun, Bajau, etc. We are ALL Malaysians!
Finally, the political “culture” of Malaysia is also about equality and justice, non-corruption and multiculturalism. It does not limit within the racialized and ethnicized ideological domain such as whether it is a Malay versus non-Malay, Indian versus Malay, etc.
The People Power Party is ready to moblilise its 10 million supporters to counter the antiThaksin protests, MP Pracha Prasopdee said on Monday.
Pracha was reacting to the announcement by the People’s Alliance for Democracy threatening to revive street protests to oppose the return of former prime minister Thaksin Shinwatra on grounds of the government’s tampering with the legal proceedings to help him eluding the law.
“If the PAD becomes active, I plan to confront it by mobilising 10 million People Power supporters,” Pracha said.
Although he doubted whether the PAD could attract the crowds to join its street protests, he would not allow PAD leaders to disrupt the restoration of democratic rule, he said.
PAD follows Samak in drawing itself into a corner. They haven’t done enough harm, have they?
Activists reverse, oppose return of Thaksin
(BangkokPost.com) – The group that staged huge street demonstrations before the military stepped in and overthrew Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra resurrected itself on Monday and threatened to start the protests again.
The People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) suddenly on Monday morning turned against the return to Thailand by Mr Thaksin for any reason.
Leaders of the group, including newspaper tycoon Sondhi Limthongkul and Buddhist sect activist Maj-Gen Chamlong Srimuang, said at a special meeting to the current government was acting in the interests of “the Thaksin regime,” and PAD instead to step up protests.
In a seven-point statement, PAD resolved “to oppose the return of Thaksin” and threatened to return to the street protests if, as likely, the ex-premier comes back to Thailand.
“The PAD has never opposed the return of Mr Thaksin if the former premier comes back to fight corruption charges in court, without interference from the current government,” said the statement.
“But since the Thaksin regime has interfered in the justice system, the PAD now must oppose Mr Thaksin’s return.”
The statement called on “the people, civil servants, the military, police who love the country” to be ready to restart street protests which drew up to half a million people during the summer of 2006.
Mr Sondhi, the founder of the anti-Thaksin movement in September, 2005, said the new “Thaksin regime” was “the ugliest government in history.”
The publisher of Manager Group said he and supporters did not wish to act against Mr Thaksin if he wished to return to Thailand to prove his innocence in court. “But the PAD will never allow the government to interfere in the justice system,” he vowed.
Maj Gen Chamlong said the PAD had to emerge again “because the country now faces a big problem.”
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee said he hoped there would be no problem or unrest when Mr Thaksin returns. All parties, including PAD, should recognise the ex-premier is a Thai citizen, with the right of return.
In addition, it is good if he returns to fight criminal charges in court, said Dr Surapong. No matter what PAD thinks about the government, he said, “No one can interfere with the court and justice procedure.”
PAD’s seven-point statement also called on the Election Commission “to have the courage” to recommend that the ruling People Power party be dissolved for acting as a proxy for the disbanded Thai Rak Thai of Mr Thaksin.
It renewed touchy and controversial calls that Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej swear allegiance to nation, religion and King, and “stop acting as a puppet of Mr Thaksin” – words almost custom-designed to raise an equally acerbic response from Mr Samak.
It also called on the government to stop interfering with the media, to review its decision to remove the chief of the Department of Special Investigations, and to stop alleged interference in the work of the Assets Scrutiny Committee (ASC), the Supreme Court, the National Counter Corruption Commission, the Department of Special Investigation and the National Police Bureau.
TN 25 February 2008
Well articulated AjarnMichael!
I find it deeply disturbing that many highly respectable, knowledgeable and talented commentors are so quiet (or so easily, conveniently overlook – or even dismissive?) about the War on Drugs (part 2 is sadly on the drawing boards), Krue-sae and Takbai.
While I strongly agree that the tragic events in 1973 and 1976 are critical events in Thai democratic history and certainly needs more study, the three events I mentioned are much more recent and immediate – and relevant to the present. How are the three related to democracy? We have to remember that the violence perpetrated against the innocent in 1973 and 1976 were carried out in pseudo-democratic, military dominated times (a highly muddled time – fights for democracy Vs fight against communism). The War on Drugs, Krue-sae and Takbai have been carried out under a popularly elected government only a few years ago. By that standard, when society has matured democratically, democratic institutions more sophisticated, and the rule of law much more effective than in the 1970s, the crimes and unaccountability of those who committed it are far worse.
In the context of the thousands of death, many of whom are innocent – and with no justice in sight, I find the silence in this blog deafening. The deep hate for monarchy seems to have blinded many here on the very basic issues of basic human rights, crime and justice – and the man most accountable seems to be favourably assessed as a ‘democratic hero’ because he happens to also be the apparent ‘hero of the cause’! Are we confusing personal hate for democracy that we are not thinking and writing with clarity? Michael seems to be that rare exception here.
Do you know where the event was publicised ? In the light of the dispute between AOT & KingPower (see links in my #50), it’s quite significant. A reference would make it kosher.
….engage in some meaningful analysis of the implementation and impacts of these policies
Please start with the new War on Drugs “populist” policy.
I look forward to AW’s (and the other PPP cheerleaders) take on recent events, and wonder if they are still going to blame those Bangkok elites and the ‘invisible hand’ for everything?
Snarls, the phrase “spend at his pleasure” is generally used in the television or news report whenever somebody gives money to the royals.
Its true #48 is not verified but it sounds extremely real. These things happen all the time and money is given to “spend at your pleasure” on television even. I’ve personally watch many an 8 o’clock news piece about somebody giving something to the royals. King Power, as with thousands of other firms, probably have done it.
The above post has borrowed just one of your pictures, and quoted a little of your text, with a link to your blog post above indicating that your entire article is worth checking out. Hopefully you won’t mind too much, because there are a number of interesting newspaper article quotes that are highly relevant. There is also a map scan to compare with your Stilwell Park poster board.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Royalist propaganda and policy nonsense
Thank you Chris Baker!
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
One should be careful with the concept of legitimacy. This is an empirical concept. Whether or not something is legitimate depends on the empirical existence of a certain group of people who think that this something is exemplary and should be the way it is. This normally concerns only a small group of people. A bigger group of people is covered by the term mass compliance. People comply with demands for action for a variety of reasons, e.g. because they think a policy direction is good, or a leader is strong. Finally, there are those who do or think things merely out of being used to them.
When a person or group claims that, e.g. Thaksin, had lost his legitimacy, then the questions are: 1) Were there no people any longer who thought that he is good and should be PM; 2) Were there no people any longer who complied with his requests?
Merely claiming that a person or a structure had lost its legitimacy, without looking into the empirical situation, is a rather silly political approach to a social science concept. This approach merely means that a person (Sonthi, e.g.) or group (PAD, e.g.) did not like Thaksin/TRT any longer. It has nothing to do with legitimacy as a scholarly term, but it uses its good name and honorable ring.
Royalist propaganda and policy nonsense
Vichai Raksriaksorn, chairman of King Power, presented the money to the king on 7 February 2008. A picture of the event appeared on p. 20 of Matichon daily (Prachachuen section) on 21 February. The amount was 900 million baht. This was not a donation by Vichai or King Power, but the proceeds of a charity fund-raising scheme which Vichai and King Power helped to organize – selling plastic wristbands and related material with royal insignia.
On the Forbes 2007 list, Vichai ranked 21st among Thais with a fortune of US$ 205 million (about 6.5 billion baht).
His history is pretty obscure, and I’d welcome any info from anyone who knows more than this:
He had his first duty free (DF) venture in Hong Kong airport in the 1980s. He could not break the ring at Don Muang (run by Sombun Rahong), but opened the in-town DF store at Ploenchit in 1989. He also started DF shops in Cambodia, China, and Macao. By 1995 he managed to get round Rahong, make connections in the air force and AAT, and opened a shop in Don Muang in 1995. ACM Phinit Saraithong is now on King Power board. In 2006, he got an exclusive 10-year deal to run DF and retail at Suvarnabhumi.
He likes polo. He goes to UK and plays with Princes Charles and William. He recently bought 384 rai from the Chan Issara family near the airport. On this he is building a polo field, 9-hole golf course, and forty-nine 2-rai housing plots.
He is developing a 31 rai plot in Soi Rang-ngam (near Victory Monument) with an office building for his group, a DF mall, and the Pullman King Power hotel. The land is leased from the Crown Property Bureau.
Anyone know anything more? What’s his background? What’s the HK connection? Is he another split family like Sophonphanich, Asvabhokin, etc ? Who were his key contacts in the air force?
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
The MORE anyone, like Michael, claims ‘moral high-grounds’ or ‘principles’ (socialists, human rights, or whatever) against elected politicians, but not dare doing the same to THE MUDERER BEHIND SARIT AND 6 TULA, the more that person is a fake.
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
In 1957 immediately after Sarit seized power, Bhumibol issued a proclamation appointing Sarit as “Gardian of the Capital” and urged all citizens to obey Sarit. The proclamation HAD NO COUNTERSIGNATURE in DIRECT VIOLATION of the 1952 Constitution. Sarit then went on to kill people without any due process whatsover.
WHO SUPPORTED HIM?
WHO was the ‘invisible hand’ behind 6 Tula, the most brutal massacre in modern Thai history?
ISSUE THE CALL NOW, Michael.
Otherwise all your ‘brave’, ‘socialit’, ‘leftist’ denunciations of Thaksin, your call for him to go , etc. ARE ALL FAKE.
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
Say the same thing now:
THAKSIN is illegitimate (abuse of power, human right violation, “blood-on-hands”, etc.) and HE MUST GO.
only replace the word Thaksin with KB.
Say it now, otherwise you’re only an imposter!
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
I’m really sick to have to argue this same point again. So let’s just do this:
Michael, SAY THE SAME THING TO BHUMIBOL AS YOU SAY TO THAKSIN NOW and I’ll stop writing.
Otherwise, SHAME ON YOU for being only able to denouce elected politician.
р╕Ыр╕▒р╕Нр╕лр╕▓р╕Чр╕▒р╣Йр╕Зр╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Др╕Щр╕нр╕вр╣Ир╕▓р╕З Michael р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Юр╕зр╕Б “р╕кр╕нр╕Зр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Ар╕нр╕▓” р╕Бр╣Зр╕Др╕╖р╕н р╕нр╕вр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╣Бр╕лр╕ер╕░
р╕Чр╕│р╕Ыр╕▓р╕Бр╕Бр╕ер╣Йр╕▓ р╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Чр╕▒р╕Бр╕йр╕┤р╕У р╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Щр╕▒р╕Бр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕З
р╕Юр╕╣р╕Фр╕нр╕вр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╣Ар╕Фр╕╡р╕вр╕зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ъ KB р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Фр╕╣р╕лр╕Щр╣Ир╕нр╕в
р╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Ар╕Кр╣Ир╕Щр╕Щр╕▒р╣Йр╕Щ р╕Др╕╕р╕Ур╕нр╕▓р╕ир╕▒р╕вр╕лр╕ер╕▒р╕Бр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕нр╕░р╣Др╕гр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕нр╣Йр╕▓р╕Зр╕зр╣Ир╕▓ р╕Хр╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕Фр╣Ир╕▓р╕Чр╕▒р╕Бр╕йр╕┤р╕У?
р╕Др╕╕р╕Ур╕Чр╕Щр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╣Др╕бр╣Ир╕Фр╣Ир╕▓ KB р╣Др╕Фр╣Й р╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕Чр╕Щр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Др╕Фр╣Й р╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╣Др╕бр╣Ир╕Фр╣Ир╕▓р╕Чр╕▒р╕Бр╕йр╕┤р╕У?
р╕Юр╕зр╕Бр╕Бр╕ер╣Йр╕▓р╕Ыр╕ер╕нр╕бр╣Жр╣Бр╕Ър╕Ър╕Щр╕╡р╣Й р╕Ьр╕б “р╣Вр╕Др╕Хр╕г” р╣Ар╕Ър╕╖р╣Ир╕н р╣Бр╕ер╕░ р╣Ар╕лр╕вр╕╡р╕вр╕Фр╕лр╕вр╕▓р╕бр╣Ар╕ер╕в
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
Being against the coup, does not have to mean that one must support Thaksin. Why people such as Somsak continue to require that people support the legitimacy of figures such as Thaksin I have no idea
I have no time at the moment for a long reply to Michael’s post. I just want to ask these direct questions:
Would you dare saying the same thing about King Bhumibol? If not, why? If not, why on earth would you say this to an elected PM?
Is KB more legitimate than Thaksin? Even IF you claim BOTH are EQUALLY ILLEGITMATE, WHY NOT DARE SAYING SO?
The PRETENTION of the “song mai aw” camp is just that: they ONLY dare saying “YOU’RE FREAKING ILLEGITMATE to one side. BUT WHERE IS THE SAME COURAGE TO SAY SO TO “ANOTHER SIDE?
There is in fact NO “song mai ao”. Only those р╕Фр╕▒р╕Фр╕Ир╕гр╕┤р╕Х like Michael who can only show “courage” to attack politician.
I CHALLANGE YOU RIGHT NOW TO SAY : IS BHUMIBOL LEGITIMATE? SHOUD HE GO? Issue a call NOW, like you do in Thaksin’s case, to OUST KB!
IF anybody who claim to “DON’T WANT BOTH SIDE” can show he/she applies THE SAME CRITERIA, the SAME KIND OF DENUNCIATION, the SAME KIND of “brave” WORD with KB as he/she does with Thaksin, I’LL STOP WRITING forever!
Put a blogger into parliament
The statement above has some faulty information.
First, Koh Tsu Koon is not from UMNO’s political party but from Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia (Malaysian People’s Movement Party), another political party from the Barisan Nasional (National Front), which UMNO is one of parties.
Second, Jeff Ooi is a Malaysian born in the northern Malaysian state of Kedah and grew up among Malay children in kampung (rural)environment. The statement indicated that “It will be interesting to see if a non-Malaysian can break the UMNO stranglehold” is misleading. It should be “It will be interesting to see if a non-Malay ethnic group…”
The category of “non-Malaysian” will be mistakenly see Jeff Ooi as a non-Malaysian citizen. In addition, “Malaysian” does not refer to Malay or someone who belongs to Malay ethnic group per se. It encompases all the ethnic groups such as Chinese, Tamils, Eurasians, Ibans, Bidayuhs, Kadazan-dusun, Bajau, etc. We are ALL Malaysians!
Finally, the political “culture” of Malaysia is also about equality and justice, non-corruption and multiculturalism. It does not limit within the racialized and ethnicized ideological domain such as whether it is a Malay versus non-Malay, Indian versus Malay, etc.
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
PPP is ready for the PAD! Great fun ahead…
People Power ready for headon collision with PAD
The People Power Party is ready to moblilise its 10 million supporters to counter the antiThaksin protests, MP Pracha Prasopdee said on Monday.
Pracha was reacting to the announcement by the People’s Alliance for Democracy threatening to revive street protests to oppose the return of former prime minister Thaksin Shinwatra on grounds of the government’s tampering with the legal proceedings to help him eluding the law.
“If the PAD becomes active, I plan to confront it by mobilising 10 million People Power supporters,” Pracha said.
Although he doubted whether the PAD could attract the crowds to join its street protests, he would not allow PAD leaders to disrupt the restoration of democratic rule, he said.
The Nation 25 February 2008
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
Sorry, the source is BP’s web site, of course.
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
PAD follows Samak in drawing itself into a corner. They haven’t done enough harm, have they?
Activists reverse, oppose return of Thaksin
(BangkokPost.com) – The group that staged huge street demonstrations before the military stepped in and overthrew Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra resurrected itself on Monday and threatened to start the protests again.
The People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) suddenly on Monday morning turned against the return to Thailand by Mr Thaksin for any reason.
Leaders of the group, including newspaper tycoon Sondhi Limthongkul and Buddhist sect activist Maj-Gen Chamlong Srimuang, said at a special meeting to the current government was acting in the interests of “the Thaksin regime,” and PAD instead to step up protests.
In a seven-point statement, PAD resolved “to oppose the return of Thaksin” and threatened to return to the street protests if, as likely, the ex-premier comes back to Thailand.
“The PAD has never opposed the return of Mr Thaksin if the former premier comes back to fight corruption charges in court, without interference from the current government,” said the statement.
“But since the Thaksin regime has interfered in the justice system, the PAD now must oppose Mr Thaksin’s return.”
The statement called on “the people, civil servants, the military, police who love the country” to be ready to restart street protests which drew up to half a million people during the summer of 2006.
Mr Sondhi, the founder of the anti-Thaksin movement in September, 2005, said the new “Thaksin regime” was “the ugliest government in history.”
The publisher of Manager Group said he and supporters did not wish to act against Mr Thaksin if he wished to return to Thailand to prove his innocence in court. “But the PAD will never allow the government to interfere in the justice system,” he vowed.
Maj Gen Chamlong said the PAD had to emerge again “because the country now faces a big problem.”
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee said he hoped there would be no problem or unrest when Mr Thaksin returns. All parties, including PAD, should recognise the ex-premier is a Thai citizen, with the right of return.
In addition, it is good if he returns to fight criminal charges in court, said Dr Surapong. No matter what PAD thinks about the government, he said, “No one can interfere with the court and justice procedure.”
PAD’s seven-point statement also called on the Election Commission “to have the courage” to recommend that the ruling People Power party be dissolved for acting as a proxy for the disbanded Thai Rak Thai of Mr Thaksin.
It renewed touchy and controversial calls that Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej swear allegiance to nation, religion and King, and “stop acting as a puppet of Mr Thaksin” – words almost custom-designed to raise an equally acerbic response from Mr Samak.
It also called on the government to stop interfering with the media, to review its decision to remove the chief of the Department of Special Investigations, and to stop alleged interference in the work of the Assets Scrutiny Committee (ASC), the Supreme Court, the National Counter Corruption Commission, the Department of Special Investigation and the National Police Bureau.
TN 25 February 2008
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
Well articulated AjarnMichael!
I find it deeply disturbing that many highly respectable, knowledgeable and talented commentors are so quiet (or so easily, conveniently overlook – or even dismissive?) about the War on Drugs (part 2 is sadly on the drawing boards), Krue-sae and Takbai.
While I strongly agree that the tragic events in 1973 and 1976 are critical events in Thai democratic history and certainly needs more study, the three events I mentioned are much more recent and immediate – and relevant to the present. How are the three related to democracy? We have to remember that the violence perpetrated against the innocent in 1973 and 1976 were carried out in pseudo-democratic, military dominated times (a highly muddled time – fights for democracy Vs fight against communism). The War on Drugs, Krue-sae and Takbai have been carried out under a popularly elected government only a few years ago. By that standard, when society has matured democratically, democratic institutions more sophisticated, and the rule of law much more effective than in the 1970s, the crimes and unaccountability of those who committed it are far worse.
In the context of the thousands of death, many of whom are innocent – and with no justice in sight, I find the silence in this blog deafening. The deep hate for monarchy seems to have blinded many here on the very basic issues of basic human rights, crime and justice – and the man most accountable seems to be favourably assessed as a ‘democratic hero’ because he happens to also be the apparent ‘hero of the cause’! Are we confusing personal hate for democracy that we are not thinking and writing with clarity? Michael seems to be that rare exception here.
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
“wellbeing and social justice, democratic socialism” >> Oops — Michael has become a social democrat! Or is the emphasis on “socialism”? 🙂
Royalist propaganda and policy nonsense
Somsak & Teth, thanks for that very useful info.
Do you know where the event was publicised ? In the light of the dispute between AOT & KingPower (see links in my #50), it’s quite significant. A reference would make it kosher.
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
“including the demobilisation of radical forces in the 1970s, in which the monarchy played a key role.”
That’s the key error of your piece. Or at least it is the section that needs clarification.
Otherwise its a thoughtful and comprehensive piece of opinion. As I myself would say that I belong to the “song mai aow” camp.
The electorate and the “acute state of Thai politics”
A new look at “populist” policies
….engage in some meaningful analysis of the implementation and impacts of these policies
Please start with the new War on Drugs “populist” policy.
I look forward to AW’s (and the other PPP cheerleaders) take on recent events, and wonder if they are still going to blame those Bangkok elites and the ‘invisible hand’ for everything?
Royalist propaganda and policy nonsense
Snarls, the phrase “spend at his pleasure” is generally used in the television or news report whenever somebody gives money to the royals.
Its true #48 is not verified but it sounds extremely real. These things happen all the time and money is given to “spend at your pleasure” on television even. I’ve personally watch many an 8 o’clock news piece about somebody giving something to the royals. King Power, as with thousands of other firms, probably have done it.
The Stilwell Road
Interesting stuff. You are indeed privileged to have travelled through this area that few visit.
http://www.angkor.com/2bangkok/2bangkok/forum/showthread.php?p=20030#post20030
The above post has borrowed just one of your pictures, and quoted a little of your text, with a link to your blog post above indicating that your entire article is worth checking out. Hopefully you won’t mind too much, because there are a number of interesting newspaper article quotes that are highly relevant. There is also a map scan to compare with your Stilwell Park poster board.